Family Affection as a Protective Factor Against the Negative Effects ofPerceived Asian Values Gap on the Parent–Child Relationship for Asian

American Male and Female College Students

Yong S. ParkUniversity of California, Santa Barbara

Leyna P. VoUniversity of California, Irvine

Yuying TsongPepperdine University

The study examined whether family affection (i.e., affective responsiveness, affectionate communication,and affective orientation) protected against the negative effects of perceived parent–child Asian valuesgap on the quality of their parent relationships for 259 female and 77 male Asian American collegestudents. Asian values gap was higher for women than men, and inversely related to a perceived healthyparent–child relationship for both genders. Participants rated the relationship with their mothers as morepositive and affectionate than with their fathers. Both parents were reported to communicate moresupportive affection than verbal and nonverbal affection. Affective responsiveness was identified as aprotective factor in the father–son relationship whereas verbal affection protected the mother–daughterrelationship. The study also revealed that daughters’ affective orientation had beneficial effects on thefather–daughter relationship at lower levels of Asian values gap. Clinical implications and directions forfuture research are discussed.

Keywords: Asian values, affective responsiveness, affectionate communication, affective orientation,parent–child relationship

Traditional Asian values, such as collectivism and filial piety,may be strongly engrained for Asian immigrant parents whoseprimary socialization experiences occurred in their Asian countriesof origin. Although parents may make efforts to impart thesetraditional values onto the next generation, Asian American youthwho are born and/or raised in the United States may be swayedinto relinquishing their traditional roots as part of the acculturationprocess. Furthermore, socializing agents outside the family, suchas schools and peer relationships, may influence them to take on amore individualistic orientation (e.g., Portes, 1997). These social-ization differences may be particularly disruptive for Asian familyrelations when considering differences that exist between tradi-tional Asian and Western values. For example, filial piety, definedas unquestioning obedience and obligation to parents (Chao, 2000;Kim, Atkinson, & Umemoto, 2001), is central to Asian culture andat a stark contrast to the Western value placed on adolescentseparation and individuation (Blos, 1967).

This so-called “Asian values gap” (Ahn, Kim, & Park, in press)may increase rapidly when Asian American children reach late

adolescence and set their sights on college. For many youth,college signifies the rite of moving away from home, and in turn,reducing contact and communication with parents (Tinto, 1988).Even college commuters may be required to spend less time withtheir parents to meet the academic and social demands of collegelife. The physical and temporal distance from parents mayentice students to engage in activities that were previouslyrestricted by their parents. For Asian American students inparticular, these new experiences may influence them to ques-tion traditional values and adapt Western values that mayconflict with their parents.

Whereas exploration and clarification of values are commondevelopmental tasks for college students, the increased values gapthat arises from this process may have larger ramifications forAsian American students because traditional Asian culture placessuch a strong importance on family relationships. According to Inoand Glicken (2002), the basic social unit in Asian culture is not theindividual, but the family. From this perspective, Asian values gapmay have a strong influence on the mental health and quality offamily relations for Asian American students. Supporting thisclaim, research has indicated that parent–child cultural differencesmay place Asian American college students at risk for intergen-erational conflict (R. H. G. Chung, 2001); psychological distress(R. M. Lee & Liu, 2001); and depressive symptoms (Aldwin &Greenberger, 1987). More recent, a study that examined KoreanAmerican college students found that parent–child Asian valuesgap was associated with greater intensity of family conflict (Ahn etal., in press).

Yong S. Park, Department of Counseling, Clinical, and School Psychol-ogy, Santa Barbara; Leyna P. Vo, School of Social Sciences, University ofCalifornia, Irvine; Yuying Tsong, Graduate School of Education andPsychology, Pepperdine University.

Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to YongPark at the Department of Counseling, Clinical, and School PsychologyProgram, University of California, Santa Barbara, CA 93106 –9490.E-mail: ypark@education.ucsb.edu

Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology © 2009 American Psychological Association2009, Vol. 15, No. 1, 18–26 1099-9809/09/$12.00 DOI: 10.1037/a0013378

18

Although research has clearly documented the negative impactof parent–child cultural differences, these differences have notbeen examined in regards to specific parent–child dyads (i.e.,father–son/daughter, mother–son/daughter). According to Fine,Moreland, and Schwebel (1983), characteristics that are typical ofa healthy parent–child relationship—closeness and communica-tion between parent and child; child’s respect and trust for parents;and clarification of family roles—may be qualitatively differentfor father–child versus mother–child relationships, suggesting theneed to study specific parent–child dyads. There is reason tobelieve that differences in these dyadic relationships may be mag-nified for Asian Americans because role expectations tend to bewell-defined and gender specific for traditional Asian families.More specifically, Uba (1994) suggested that Asian fathers tend tohold an authoritative, strict, and aloof parenting role, whereasmothers are primarily responsible for the emotional and basicneeds of the child. The patriarchal nature of this traditional familystructure may also contribute to gender differences in how youngadult sons and daughters relate to their parents. In regards to Asianvalues gap, past research has found that when compared to theirmale counterparts, females adhere less to traditional Asian values(Kim, 2001), and report higher dating and marriage conflicts withtheir parents (R. H. G. Chung, 2001).

For clinicians working with Asian American families, identify-ing factors that protect against the negative effects of parent–childcultural differences, specifically Asian values gap, across eachparent–child dyad may help clinicians generate culturally sensitiveinterventions for this problem area. To this end, the present studyreviewed the Asian American family literature and identified fam-ily affection as a potential protective factor. For instance, in onestudy that examined clinical case studies of Asian American ado-lescents, Lowinger and Kwok (2001) suggested that open andexpressive communication of parental affection may have a ben-eficial impact, but is limited in Asian American parent–childrelationships. Supporting the latter claim, W. Chung (1997) statedthat Asian American parents may be more critical, as opposed toopenly affectionate, with their children because they fear that theirchildren may become “lazy” from too much praise. On the otherhand, through various extrafamilial experiences, Asian Americanyouth may be influenced by familial norms of their EuropeanAmerican counterparts who tend to be more openly affectionate(Lin & Fu, 1990). Taken together, Asian American young adultsmay wish for a higher degree of affection than what is typicallyexpressed in a traditional Asian family. For these individuals,affection in their family environment may play a protective roleagainst the negative effects of Asian values gap. To examine thishypothesis, the present study investigates whether the followingfamily affection variables are protective factors for Asian Ameri-can parent–child relationships: affective responsiveness, affection-ate communication, and affective orientation.

According to Epstein, Bishop, Ryan, Miller, and Keitner (1993),affective responsiveness refers to the family’s ability to respondwith an appropriate emotion to a family member’s situation, suchas when the family responds to a member’s achievements withhappiness, or responds with sadness when a member has an un-fortunate experience. For Asian American families, parents maylean toward shame, as opposed to affective responsiveness, toreinforce their children’s behavior, especially in regards to aca-demic performance (Kim Berg & Jaya, 1993). From this perspec-

tive, Asian American parents may be more likely to shame theirchildren when they do not fulfill familial expectations as opposedto praising them when they meet expectations. In contrast, sham-ing may be considered harmful in Western cultures, “Too muchshaming does not result in a sense of propriety but in a secretdetermination to try to get away with things when unseen” (Erik-son, 1959, p. 69). Although avoidance of family shame is consid-ered an Asian value (B. S. K. Kim et al., 2001), Asian Americanswho do not adhere strongly to traditional Asian values may prefertheir parents to respond to their achievements with positive affectinstead of the “negative reinforcement” of a nonshaming response(W. Chung, 1997; Lowinger & Kwok, 2001).

Affectionate communication refers to how affection is expressedalong nonverbal, verbal, and supportive modes of communication.According to Floyd and Morman (1998), nonverbal affection re-fers to physical signs of affection such as holding hands andkissing, verbal affection refers to verbalizing statements such as “Ilove you,” and supportive affection involves providing help orassistance for problems (Floyd & Morman, 1998). In constructingthe Asian American Family Conflict Scale; R. M. Lee, Choe, Kim,and Ngo (2000) described how incongruent parent–child expecta-tions for affectionate communication may result in conflict forAsian Americans, as stated in an item of their Asian AmericanFamily Conflict Scale, “Your parents argue that they love you byhousing, feeding, and educating you, but you wish they wouldshow more physical and verbal signs of affection” (p. 222). Giventhe Asian cultural value of emotional restraint (B. S. K. Kim et al.,2001), Asian parents may be more likely to express their affectionthrough supportive behaviors, rather than verbal and physicalaffection.

Asian American young adults’ affective orientation may alsoplay a protective role against parent–child Asian values gap.Booth-Butterfield and Booth-Butterfield (1990) defined affectiveorientation as the ability to recognize and be guided by one’semotions as well as being able to recognize and respond to theemotional cues of others. For Asian Americans, research suggeststhat affective orientation may be more implicit (i.e., less open andverbal). More specifically, research indicates that Asian Ameri-cans, when compared to European Americans, tend to be lessexpressive about their feelings (Le, Berenbaum, & Ragha-van,2002) and use less emotional terms when communicating withothers (Frymier, Klopft, & Ishii, 1990). According to Le et al., alower tendency in Asian American parents to display physicalaffection and verbalize positive emotions may contribute to afamily environment that does not encourage explicit emotionalexpressions. Although the primary function of emotional self-restraint may be to maintain harmonious relations (e.g., B. S. K.Kim et al., 2001), an affective orientation toward recognizing andresponding to others’ emotional cues, whether they be implicitly orexplicitly communicated, may still be of value for Asian Americanfamilies. From this perspective, it is hypothesized that affectivelyoriented Asian Americans may be able to improve their parentrelationships by sensitively responding to their parents’ emotionalneeds.

In summary, the purpose of the present study is to examinewhether affection in Asian families serves as a protective factoragainst the negative effects of Asian values gap across specificparent–child relationships dyads. The study hypothesizes that thequality of the parent–child relationship for each gender-specific

19ASIAN AMERICAN FAMILY AFFECTION

dyad (i.e., father–son/daughter, mother–son/daughter) will remainunharmed even at high levels of Asian values gap when thefollowing affectionate behaviors are present: affective responsive-ness, affectionate communication, and affective orientation. Toprovide an in-depth investigation of this hypothesis, the studyposes three research questions: (a) Are there gender dyadic differ-ences in parent–child relationships, Asian values gap, and familyaffection variables?; (b) What is the relationship between Asianvalues gap and the quality of the parent–child relationship?; and(c) Does affective responsiveness, affectionate communication,and affective orientation protect the parent–child relationship fromthe negative effects of Asian values gap?

Method

Participants

Research suggests that there is a qualitative difference in theparent–child relationship between intact and divorced families(Fine et al., 1983); therefore, this study examined only AsianAmerican college students with intact families. Out of the 412respondents, 339 Asian American students, from a large WestCoast university, were eligible for the study. Of the eligible sam-ple, there were considerably more women (n � 259; 76.4%) thanmen (n � 77; 22.7%), 3 (0.9%) did not report their gender. Theaverage age was 19.91 years (SD � 1.52), with a range of 17 to 25years. The highest class level was freshman (n � 103; 30.4%),followed by junior (n � 83; 24.5%), senior (n � 79; 23.3%),sophomore (n � 70; 20.6%), and 4 (1.2%) who did not report theirclass level. Most students lived in on-campus housing (n � 153,45.1%), followed by off-campus housing with friends (n � 115,33.9%), off-campus housing with family (n � 59; 17.4%), andother housing (n � 12; 3.6%). Regarding the ethnic group distri-bution, the sample included 121 (35.7%) Chinese, 59 (17.4%)Korean, 57 (16.8%) Vietnamese, 34 (10.0%) Filipino, 17 (5.0%)Japanese, 10 (2.9%) Asian Indian, and 41 (12.2%) identified as“other Asian.” Most participants were either first (n � 91, 26.8%)or second generation (n � 226, 66.7%) whereas the remainingwere third generation or higher (n � 19, 5.6%), with 3 (0.9%)unidentified. First generation students reported being in the UnitedStates for an average of 11.31 years (SD � 5.50). A high propor-tion of the participants’ fathers (n � 297; 87.6%) and mothers (n �297; 87.6%) were reported as first generation immigrants, and theaverage number of years since immigration was 23.49 (SD � 9.02)years for fathers and 22.87 (SD � 8.57) years for mothers. Inregards to birth order, there were 159 (46.9%) first born, 114(33.6%) second born, 38 (11.2%) third born, 14 (4.1%) fourthborn, 2 (0.1%) fifth born, 6 (1.8%) higher than fifth born, and 6(1.8%) who did not report.

Measures

The measures consisted of a demographic sheet and five self-report scales: the Parent–Child Relationship Survey (PCRS; Fineet al., 1983), the Asian Values Scale–Revised (AVS–R; B. S. K.Kim & Hong, 2004), the Affective Responsiveness (AR) subscaleof the Family Assessment Device (FAD; Epstein et al., 1993), theAffectionate Communication Index (ACI; Floyd & Morman,1998), and the Affective Orientation Scale (AOS; Booth-

Butterfield & Booth-Butterfield, 1990). All scales asked studentsto rate their present perceptions of their parents and their parent–child relationship. See Table 1 for the alpha coefficients for eachof the scales.

Demographic Sheet. The demographic sheet asked informa-tion about the participants’ gender, age, ethnicity, generation, andbirth order. In addition, the participants were asked about charac-teristics of their family: annual family income, parents’ genera-tional status, parents’ marital status, parents’ English fluency, andcomposition of family members in the household.

PCRS. Fine et al. (1983) developed the 24-item PCRS tomeasure the perceived quality of adult children’s relationshipswith their fathers and mothers. The scale also measures the qualityof communication and level of involvement with parents. In thepresent study, each item was scored on a 7-point scale rangingfrom 1 (almost none) to 7 (a great deal). Sample items include“How much do you trust your mother/father?,” “How close do youfeel to your mother/father?,” and “How much do you respect yourmother/father?” The alpha coefficients for the PCRS in the presentstudy were .88, .88, .91, and .88 for father–son, mother–son,father–daughter, and mother–daughter dyads, respectively.

AVS–R. To measure parent–child Asian values gap, the studyutilized the AVS–R (B. S. K. Kim & Hong, 2004). In addition totheir own responses, participants were asked to report perceptionsof their fathers’ and mothers’ adherence to Asian cultural values.It is important to note that participants’ perceptions of parentaladherence may not necessarily be congruent with actual levels.Each of the 25 AVS–R items was rated on a 4-point scale rangingfrom 1 (strongly disagree) to 4 (strongly agree). Sample itemsread, “One should not deviate from familial and social norms,”“One’s achievements should be viewed as the family’s achieve-ments,” and “The worst thing one can do is to bring disgrace toone’s family reputation.” The difference between the perceived

Table 1Alpha Coefficients, Means, and Standard Deviations for AsianValues Gap, Parent–Child Relationship, and the FamilyAffection Variables

Men(N � 77)

Women(N � 259)

Variable � M SD M SD

Asian values gap with father .77 �0.33 0.84 0.11 1.04Asian values gap with mother .80 �0.27 0.97 0.09 1.06Affective responsiveness .67 2.64 0.53 2.68 0.50Affective communications

Father nonverbal .87 3.41 1.67 3.83 1.64Father verbal .93 4.38 1.79 4.20 1.93Father supportive .85 4.85 1.58 4.72 1.57Mother nonverbal .91 4.26 1.48 4.48 1.57Mother verbal .84 5.10 1.66 4.81 1.75Mother supportive .92 5.18 1.37 5.28 1.39

Affective orientation .87 3.53 0.50 3.67 0.48Relationship with father .90 4.83 0.78 4.73 0.88Relationship with mother .88 4.99 0.79 5.13 0.74

Note. Asian values gap scores are based on the difference betweenstandardized parent and student Asian values scores. Nonverbal, verbal,and supportive refer to subscales of the Affectionate CommunicationInventory.

20 PARK, VO, AND TSONG

parents’ and participants’ AVS–R scores was used to measureAsian values gap. Because unequal variances between therespondent-perceived parents’ and the participants’ AVS–R scoresmay contribute to a biased calculation of the gap score, theperceived father and mother and participant AVS–R scores werestandardized prior to computing the difference. By scaling thevariables to each have a variance of 1, the study ensures that noAVS–R score makes a statistically larger contribution to the cal-culation of the gap score. The alpha coefficients for the AVS–Rderived Asian values gap scale were .67, .78, .76, and .80 forfather–son, mother–son, father–daughter, and mother–daughterdyads, respectively.

AR. The seven-item AR subscale of the FAD (Epstein et al.,1993) measures family members’ ability to respond to anothermember with an appropriate emotion. Participants responded toeach item on a 4-point scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to4 (strongly agree). Higher scores were associated with a higheraffective responsiveness. A sample of a positively worded item is“We express tenderness” whereas a reverse-worded sample item is“We are reluctant to show our affection to each other.” The alphacoefficients for AR were .72 and .69 for male and female partic-ipants, respectively.

ACI. Floyd and Morman (1998) developed the 19-item ACI tomeasure three areas of affectionate communication: nonverbal,verbal, and supportive. The ACI was utilized in the present studyto ask the participants about how their parents communicate af-fection to them. Each item was rated on a 7-point scale rangingfrom 1 (not at all) to 7 (all the time). Higher scores representedhigher parental affectionate communication. A sample item for thenonverbal scale is “hold hands,” a sample verbal item reads “Say,‘I love you,’” and a supportive item reads “Help each other withproblems.” For the present study, two of the items from the verbalscale were changed to fit with the purpose of the present study.“Say, “You’re a good friend,’” and “Say, “You’re my bestfriend,’” were changed to “Say, “You’re a good son/daughter,’”and “Say, ‘You make me proud,’” respectively. The alpha coeffi-cients for the ACI across the parent–child dyads ranged from .84to .92.

AOS. Booth-Butterfield and Booth-Butterfield (1990) devel-oped the 20-item AOS to measure one’s awareness of emotionsand the use of emotions in guiding behaviors. For the presentstudy, each item was scored on a 5-point Likert-type scale rangingfrom 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree) so that higherscores represented higher affective orientation. Sample items read“I am very aware of my feelings,” “I use my feelings to determinewhether to trust another person,” and “I orient to people throughmy emotions.” The alpha coefficients for the AOS were .86 and.88 for male and female participants, respectively.

Procedures and Setting

Approval from the Human Subjects Board at a large publicuniversity on the West Coast was obtained prior to data collection.Participants were recruited from the participant pool at the univer-sity’s social science department using an advertisement that re-quested participation of Asian American students only. Studentsreceived extra credit from the respective social science courses thatreferred them to the participant pool. Prior to administering thesurvey, participants were informed that their participation was

voluntary and that their individual responses would be kept con-fidential and anonymous. Once participants provided informedconsent, they completed the paper-and-pencil questionnaire in agroup setting. It took students about 30 min to complete thesurvey.

Results

Gender Differences

Repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) were con-ducted to explore gender dyadic differences (father–son/daughter,mother–son/daughter) for the quality of the parent–child relation-ship, Asian values gap, and affectionate communication (verbal,nonverbal, and supportive). Independent samples t tests were con-ducted to examine gender differences in participants’ affectiveresponsiveness and affective orientation. To maintain an overallalpha level of .05 for the five analyses, the significance level foreach analysis was reduced to .01 (.05/5 � .01).

Parent–Child Relationship. Results of a repeated measuresANOVA indicated that participants reported a more positive rela-tionship with their mothers than their fathers, F(1, 333) � 46.24,p � .001, �p

2 � 0.12. Differences in the quality of the parentrelationship between male and female participants were not ob-served.

Asian Values Gap. Results of a repeated measures ANOVAfound gender differences on Asian values gap, in which femaleparticipants reported a higher values gap than their male counter-parts, F(1, 332) � 9.64, p � .002, �p

2 � 0.03. There were nodifferences between the perceived fathers’ and mothers’ value gapscores.

Affective Responsiveness. Results of an independent samples ttest did not show any gender differences in family affective re-sponsiveness.

Affectionate Communication. Results from the repeated mea-sures ANOVA indicated that overall, their parents communicatedmore supportive affection than verbal and nonverbal affection,F(2, 332) � 90.89, p � .001, �p

2 � 0.35. Furthermore, across eachtype of affection, mothers were perceived to communicate moreaffection than fathers, F(1, 333) � 5.65, p � .001, �p

2 � 0.22. Nodifferences between male and female participants were observed inregards to the amount of affection participants received from eitherparent.

Affective Orientation. Although the result of the independentsamples t test was not significant at the .01 alpha level, femaleparticipants reported a higher affective orientation than males,t(334) � 2.19, p � .030, d � 0.28.

Asian Values Gap and Parent–Child Relationship

To examine the second research question, a total of five zero-order correlational analyses were conducted, and the per compar-ison alpha was reduced to .01 to maintain a .05 overall alpha level.Results indicated that there was a strong correlation betweenfather’s and mother’s Asian values gap, r � .85, p � .001.Furthermore, there were significant, inverse relationships betweenAsian values gap and the quality of parent–child relationship foreach dyad: father–son, r � �.38, p � .001; father–daughter, r �

21ASIAN AMERICAN FAMILY AFFECTION

�.34, p � .001; mother–son, r � �.45, p � .001; and mother–daughter, r � �.41, p � .001 (See Table 2).

Protective Factors in Parent–Child Relationships

Control Variables. Prior to examining the third research ques-tion, the study assessed for the possible confounding effects ofparticipants demographics on the parent–child relationship. Birthorder was also examined as a potential control variable becausepast research suggests that parenting styles may vary based onbirth order (Someya, Uehara, Kadowaki, Tang, & Takahashi,2000). Results from the zero-order correlations indicated thatfamily income and father’s English fluency were positively relatedand birth order was negatively related to both father– and mother–child relationships at the .05 alpha level. As a result, these signif-icant variables were controlled for in the subsequent analyses.

Analysis Strategies. The study considered family affection tobe a protective factor if there was an inverse relationship betweenAsian values gap and quality of the parent–child relationship forthose participants reporting a lower level of family affection, butnot for those with higher levels. To test this moderation model,hierarchical regression analyses were conducted with Asian valuesgap as the predictor variable, family affection variables as themoderators, and the quality of the parent–child relationship as thecriterion variable. The family affection moderators were affectiveresponsiveness, parents’ verbal affectionate communication, par-ents’ nonverbal affectionate communication, parents’ supportiveaffectionate communication, and participants’ affective orienta-tion. For each hierarchical regression analysis, confounding demo-graphic variables, including family income, father’s English flu-ency, and birth order were entered first to be controlled for. Next,the centered Asian values gap and the centered family affectionvariables were entered. Asian value gap and family affection werecentered to avoid possible multicollinearity. Last, the interactionbetween the Asian values gap and the family affection variableswere entered. The interaction term was calculated by multiplyingthe centered Asian values gap and the centered family affectionvariables. The significance of the R2 change from the second tothird step was examined to determine a significant moderatoreffect. The per comparison level was reduced to .01 to maintain a

family-wise alpha level of .05, because five moderation analyseswere conducted for each parent–child dyad. Interaction graphswere plotted if a significant moderator effect was found. Further-more, post hoc simple slopes analyses were conducted for eachsignificant moderator with a Bonferroni corrected alpha level.

Results from the hierarchical regression analyses indicated sig-nificant moderator effects for the father–son, father–daughter, andmother–daughter relationships (See Table 3). No significant mod-

Table 2Zero-Order Correlation Matrix of Study Variables by Gender

Variable 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

1. Father Asian values gap — .85�� �.26�� �.26�� �.24�� �.35�� �.22�� �.24�� �.35�� .13� �.34�� �.33��

2. Mother Asian values gap .85�� — �.25�� �.22�� �.22�� �.28�� �.26�� �.27�� �.37�� .14� �.29�� �.41��

3. Affective responsiveness �.16 �.15 — .43�� .48�� .49�� .37�� .44�� .46�� .19�� .45�� .37��

4. Father nonverbal �.15 �.07 .40�� — .68�� .71�� .71�� .47�� .55� .04 .53�� .33��

5. Father verbal �.11 �.08 .39�� .50�� — .73�� .41�� .75�� .56�� �.00 .62�� .40��

6. Father supportive �.12 �.06 .49�� .60�� .71�� — .47�� .50�� .76�� .05 .73�� .47��

7. Mother nonverbal �.27� �.18 .34�� .72�� .43�� .55�� — .54�� .65�� .06 .31�� .46��

8. Mother verbal �.28� �.21 .36�� .31�� .76�� .51�� .51�� — .67�� .07 .46�� .53��

9. Mother supportive �.24� �.21 .40�� .50�� .66�� .86�� .63�� .70�� — .12� .56�� .68��

10. Affective orientation .14 .13 .15 .05 �.05 .05 .06 .04 �.01 — .10 .19��

11. Father relationship �.38�� �.31�� .50�� .56�� .56�� .64�� .46�� .55�� .68�� �.09 — .61��

12. Mother relationship �.42�� �.45�� .45�� .43�� .51�� .54��

.44�� .57�� .68�� �.06 .86�� —

Note. Male results are displayed on the bottom, left half of the matrix while female results are displayed on the top, right half. Nonverbal, verbal, andsupportive refer to subscales of the Affectionate Communication Inventory.� p � .05. �� p � .01.

Table 3Results of Significant Moderation Tests Across theParent–Child Dyads

Variable � t �R2 �F p

DV: Father–son relationship(N � 67)

Step 1: Control variables .12 2.84 .045Step 2: Father Asian values

gap (A) �.32 �3.18 .31 16.18 � .001Affective responsiveness (B) .42 4.14 � .001Step 3: A � B .30 2.92 .07 8.51 .005

DV: Father–daughterrelationship (N � 240)

Step 1: Control variables .04 3.57 .015Step 2: Father Asian values

gap (A) �.37 �6.12 .14 19.83 � .001Affective orientation (B) .14 2.24 .026Step 3: A � B �.17 �2.86 .03 8.19 .005

DV: Mother–daughterrelationship (N � 239)

Step 1: Control variables .04 3.00 .031Step 2: Mother Asian values

gap (A) �.29 �5.58 .36 69.63 � .001Verbal affection (B) .46 8.68 � .001Step 3: A � B .15 2.92 .02 8.50 .004

Note. Hierarchical multiple regression analyses were conducted to testthe moderator effects of the family affection variables. Step 1 contained thecontrol variables: family income, birth order, and father’s English fluency.Step 2 contained the Asian values gap and one of the family affectionvariables. Step 3 only contained the interaction term. No significant mod-erator effects were found for the mother–son relationship. DV � quality ofparent–child relationship.

22 PARK, VO, AND TSONG

erators were found for the mother–son relationship. Because threesignificant moderators were found, the alpha level of the post hocsimple slopes analyses was reduced to .017 (.05/3 � .017) with theBonferroni correction. Results for each parent–child dyad relation-ship are discussed below.

Father–Son Relationship. Results indicated that affective re-sponsiveness significantly moderated the relationship betweenAsian values gap and the quality of the father–son relationship,�R2 � .07, �F � 8.51, p � .005. The interaction graph (SeeFigure 1A) suggested that for male participants reporting lowaffective responsiveness, the quality of the relationship with theirfathers’ decreased as Asian values gap increased, whereas thefather–son relationship remained stable for their high affectiveresponsiveness counterparts. A simple slopes analysis found asignificantly negative slope between Asian values gap and father–son relationship for the low affective responsiveness group, � ��.53, t(18) � �2.94, p � .008, whereas a nonsignificant slopewas found for men in the high affective responsiveness group, � �.12, t(17) � 0.58, p � .572.

Mother–Son Relationship. No significant moderator effectswere found in the mother–son relationship dyad. However, thezero-order correlations suggested that Asian values gap was in-versely related, r � �.45, p � 001, whereas affective responsive-ness, r � .45, p � .001, nonverbal affection, r � .44, p � .001,verbal affection, r � .57, p � .001, and supportive affection, r �.68, p � .001 were positively related to the mother–son relation-ship.

Father–Daughter Relationship. Results of the moderator testsindicated that affective orientation significantly moderated therelationship between Asian values gap and the quality of thefather–daughter relationship, �R2 � .03, �F � 8.19, p � .005.Interpretation of the interaction graph (See Figure 1B) showedthat, for affectively oriented women, the negative slope betweenAsian values gap and the father relationship was significant, � ��.46, t(34) � �3.11, p � .004, whereas the slope for lowaffectively oriented females was not, � � �.15, t(33) � �0.86,p � .397. This suggested that although there may not be a differ-ence in the quality of the father–daughter relationship at higherlevels of Asian values gap between those female participants whowere affectively oriented and those who were not, the quality ofthe father–daughter relationship increased only for those who wereaffectively oriented at lower levels of Asian values gap.

Mother–Daughter Relationship. Verbal affection was found tosignificantly moderate the relationship between Asian values gapand the mother–daughter relationship, �R2 � .02, �F � 8.50, p �.004. For female participants who reported high parental verbalaffection, the interaction graph (See Figure 1C) showed that thequality of the mother– daughter relationship did not decrease asAsian values gap increased. A simple slopes analysis suggestedthat the slope for the high verbal affection group was notsignificant, � � �.11, t(29) � �0.70, p � .492, although therewas a significant, negative slope for women who reported lowerverbal affection, � � �.39, t(35) � �2.61, p � .013.

Discussion

In support of the study’s hypothesis, the findings suggest thatfamily affection may help attenuate the negative effects of Asianvalues gap on the parent–child relationship for Asian Americancollege students. Specifically, the results identify family affectiveresponsiveness and parental verbal affection as protective factorsfor the father–son and mother–daughter relationships, respec-tively. The study also reveals females’ affective orientation ashaving beneficial effects on the father–daughter relationship atlower levels of Asian values gap. Interpretation of the results,clinical implications, limitations of the study, and directions forfuture research are discussed.

Gender Differences

Female participants report a significantly higher Asian valuesgap with both their fathers and mothers than their male counter-parts. Given the gender inequalities that are observed in traditionalAsian American families (Pyke & Johnson, 2003), it is not sur-prising that Asian American females are less likely to adhere totraditional Asian cultural values than their male counterparts(B. S. K. Kim, 2001), which in turn, may increase Asian valuesgap between Asian American daughters and their parents.

Ratings of the mother–child relationship as more positive andaffectionate than those of the father–child relationship are consis-tent with traditional Asian gender roles that expect mothers to benurturing and involved, and fathers to take on an authoritarian,distant role in child rearing (Uba, 1994). The finding that partic-ipants perceived both mothers and fathers to communicate more

Figure 1. Relationship between Asian values gap and quality of parent–child relationships by high and lowlevels of family affection. For each interaction graph, the high level reflects 1 standard deviation above theaverage value of the family affection variable, whereas the low level reflects 1 standard deviation below.PCRS � Parent Child Relationship Survey. � p � .05. �� p � .01.

23ASIAN AMERICAN FAMILY AFFECTION

supportive affection than verbal and nonverbal affection is alsoconsistent with past research. Chao (2000) found that Asian Amer-ican parents tend to show support through involvement such assetting aside time to take their children to various afterschoolactivities and buying necessary materials for the child. Althoughthe results indicate an emphasis on supportive affection, resultsfrom the zero-order correlations indicate that Asian Americanparents who engage in supportive affection are also likely to bemore verbally and nonverbally affectionate, suggesting that thesetypes of affectionate behaviors are not mutually exclusive.

Asian Values Gap and Parent–Child Relationship

For both males and female participants, Asian values gap isinversely related to a perceived positive parent–child relationship.In other words, those participants who perceived their parents to bemore traditional than themselves report having more negativerelationships with their parents. The study also observed a strong,positive correlation between fathers’ and mothers’ values gap. Thisfinding may indicate that students perceive their parents to beunited in their endorsement of traditional Asian values. In thiscase, students may not be able to seek refuge from either father ormother in regards to Asian values gap, and in turn, must reconcilethese differences with both parents.

Protective Factors in the Parent–Child Relationship

Results indicate that the impact of family affection variables isdifferent for each parent–child dyad. For the father–son relation-ship, male students with low affective responsiveness perceivehaving relatively less healthy father relationships at high levels ofAsian values gap. On the other hand, even when there are greatdifferences in Asian values, fathers and sons who are affectivelyresponsive to one another may be able to maintain relativelyhealthy relationships. This finding is consistent with Chua andFujino’s (1999) suggestion that Asian American men may beredefining their Asian masculinity in a way that moves away from“hegemonic masculinity,” which emphasizes male dominance inrelationships, to qualities that are more affectively and relationallyoriented, such as being “sensitive to feelings” and “nurturing.”From this perspective, fathers and sons who are responsive to eachothers’ feelings may still be able to maintain a healthy relationshipdespite high Asian values gap.

Contrary to the hypotheses, the moderator tests pertaining to themother–son relationship are found to be nonsignificant. Eventhough there are strong positive zero-order correlations betweenaffective responsiveness and mother’s affectionate communicationwith the quality of the mother–son relationship, the study did notfind these family affection variables to attenuate the negativeeffects of Asian values gap. It may be the case that less traditionalAsian American sons interpret their more traditional mothers’affectionate behaviors, especially supportive affection, as signs ofoverindulgence rather than signs of love and care. According toKim Berg and Jaya (1993), traditional Asian mothers may “pam-per” their adult-aged sons and discourage adolescent children fromlearning “self-care skills, such as doing their own laundry, clean-ing their own room, or cooking their own meals” (p. 33) to solidifytheir position in the family when her son becomes the head of thehousehold, and when she reaches old age and is no longer able to

care for and support herself. Although there are culturally validreasons for these parenting behaviors, a less traditional AsianAmerican son may perceive these behaviors as threats to theirindependence and self-care responsibilities.

Although not in the hypothesized direction, affective orientationis found to moderate the relationship between Asian values gapand the father–daughter relationship. Affectively oriented femaleyoung adults report a relatively healthier father–daughter relation-ship at lower levels of Asian values gap, but the quality of therelationship with fathers becomes worse as values gap increases.At higher levels of Asian values gap, more traditional fathers maydevalue emotional expression, and as a result, may not acknowl-edge nor validate their daughters’ feelings. Because emotions playa large role in how affectively oriented individuals interact withothers, these females may have a negative view of their father–daughter relationship when their emotions are not respected.Meanwhile, the relationship may remain unaffected by Asianvalues gap for females who are not affectively oriented becausethey are not as aware of their own emotions and/or do not useemotions in relating to their fathers.

Verbal affection is identified as a protective factor for themother–daughter relationship. Specifically, the quality of therelationship remains unaffected at increasing levels of Asian val-ues gap for young adult daughters who receive high verbal affec-tion from their mothers. On the other hand, Asian values gap isreported to negatively affect the mother-daughter relationshipfor female participants receiving low verbal affection. Perhapsat high levels of values gap, Asian American daughters may beexpected to abide by a patriarchal family structure that may beperceived as gender oppressive. When compared to their breth-ren, Asian American daughters may have lower decision mak-ing power, restricted freedom, and more domestic responsibil-ities in a traditional Asian family (see Pyke & Johnson, 2003).In the case that Asian American females challenge this patri-archal structure, these females may garner scrutiny and verbalcriticism from their more traditional mothers for not fulfillingtraditional gender role expectations.

Clinical Implications

Clinical interventions are needed to address the negative effectsof Asian values gap, which are found in the present study to beassociated with perceptions of a less healthy parent–child relation-ship (i.e., lower closeness, communication, respect, trust, and roleclarity) from the perspective of Asian American college students.Despite the positive implications of family affection, the motiva-tion for Asian family members to engage in affectionate behaviorsmay be low. Because emotional self-restraint is a traditional Asianvalue, the more traditional Asian parents may believe they shouldnot express their affections verbally or nonverbally. If cliniciansare insensitive to this traditional Asian value or Asian familynorms for affectionate responses or expressions, family membersmay feel threatened or offended by the suggestion that they bemore affectionate to each other.

Therefore, when working with Asian American families, clini-cians should be mindful of the level of Asian values gap in thefamily as well as each family members’ understandings and ex-pectations for their preferred communication and response modal-ities. For instance, the more traditional parents may expect their

24 PARK, VO, AND TSONG

children to obey them without expressing any anger or frustrationswhen there are disagreements. On the other hand, more accultur-ated children may expect their parents, on a regular basis, to offerencouragement or validations rather than criticism. To identifythese family dynamics, it is important to assess the young adultchildren’s perceptions of the Asian values held by each familymember. This is particularly important because Asian young adultsexperiencing intergenerational conflicts may not be aware thatthese conflicts derive from values gap, which in turn, may con-tribute to such perceptions as “my parents are being difficult orarchaic.”

From a family systems perspective, it is recommended thatclinicians adopt a holistic model in assessing the internal familysystem and external factors including the community and otherenvironmental stressors (E. Lee, 1982). Furthermore, clinicians areencouraged to not only assess for family stress and pathologiesrelated to Asian values gap, but also assess and highlight theindividual and family strength in members’ abilities to adapt, cope,and manage the problems in the parent–child relationship. Thiscan be achieved by asking questions about the acculturation levelof each family member, perceived roles and expectations,decision-making process, family communication patterns, andchild rearing practices. In addition to clinical interviewing, aformal assessment tool, such as the Asian American Family Con-flict Scale (R. M. Lee et al., 2000), can be useful.

It has been suggested that the use of reframing technique andfacilitating the understanding of the family’s rules are helpfulwhen working with ethnic minority families (Ho, 1987). From thisperspective, clinicians may frame the values gap exploration as anopportunity for students to gain a better understanding and appre-ciation for their parents’ thoughts, feelings, and behaviors; and tosee affectionate communication as a helpful tool in reducingconflicts and improving their relationships. For example, it may bebeneficial to help students interpret their parents’ supportive be-haviors as signs of affection, which in turn may help students feelcared for and loved by their parents despite receiving low levels ofverbal and nonverbal affection.

For female students in particular, the ability to be aware of ownemotions and use of emotions in guiding behaviors had beneficialeffects on the father-daughter relationship when their Asian valuesare similar. Therefore, when working with young adult femaleclients, it may be especially relevant to highlight the use ofself-awareness and emotions in their relationship with fathers.Furthermore, the study found that mother’s verbal affection wasa protective factor when Asian values gap was large. In cases inwhich mothers are less verbally affectionate, clinicians can helpfemale students better understand their family’s rules towardexpressing verbal affection, and help them reframe and reinter-pret their mother’s nonverbal, supportive behaviors as signs ofaffection.

For men, the ability to respond with appropriate emotions (i.e.,affective responsiveness) was found to play a protective role in thefather–son relationship at higher levels of Asian values gap. Be-cause there is often a strong expectation for Asian men to suppresstheir emotions and affective responses, they may lack the ability toidentify and/or express strong and complex feelings in an appro-priate and assertive manner. Therefore, teaching men how toappropriately express their emotions, particularly with their fa-

thers, can be an effective intervention to initiate change in thefather–son relationship.

Finally, it is important to recognize that the impact of Asianvalues gap is not limited to relationships with parents, but alsoencompasses relations with grandparents, siblings, relatives, fam-ily friends, and community members. The varying levels of Asianvalues gap within this extended network can be a potential ally inreconciling parent–child differences. More specifically, an ex-tended family or community member who is empathic and sensi-tive to values gap-related issues can be a source of support, advice,and even conflict mediation.

Limitations of the Study

A potential limitation is the study’s reliance on participants’perceptions of their parents’ adherence to Asian cultural valuesand affectionate behaviors, as opposed to parents’ own accounts oftheir behaviors. In other words, the parent–child issues that areidentified in this study are based on perceived as opposed to actualvariables. Despite this limitation, findings from past studies sug-gest that participants’ perceptions of parental behaviors may be arelevant dimension of family functioning for Asian Americans. Forexample, several studies utilized participant-perceived variables,such as perceived parental acculturation (R. M. Lee et al., 2000),perceived parental traditionalism (Aldwin & Greenberger, 1987),and perceived parent–child Asian values gap (Ahn et al., in press),and found these variables to be significantly related to mentalhealth and family conflict variables.

Issues of generalizability also need to be discussed. First, thestudy’s findings and implications may not generalize as strongly tonon-East Asian groups because the sample consisted of primarilyEast Asian students (i.e., Chinese, Korean, Vietnamese, and Jap-anese) and because of the way Asian values gap was operational-ized in the present study. Although the value domains representedin the Asian values construct (i.e., operationalized using the Asianvalues scale) were derived from a literature review of East, South,and Southeast Asian cultures, B. S. K. Kim et al. (2001) stated that“it is possible that the value dimensions reflect mainly East Asiancultures and little of South or Southeast Asian cultures” (p. 575).Second, it is unclear if the findings can be generalized to AsianAmerican youths and young adults from different age groups andacademic backgrounds. Unlike Asian Americans in their childhoodor adolescence, the college-aged participants in the present studymay be more independent because they may live separately fromtheir parents, are exposed to a wider range of values and beliefs,and have started to individuate developmentally. Third, the sam-pling strategy of recruiting through a participants’ pool resulted ina selection bias toward social science students.

Last, although Asian values gap may connote the participants’level of enculturation (i.e., maintaining ones indigenous culture)relative to their parents, the present study did not directly examinethe relationship between participants’ acculturation level and thestudy variables. Given recent literature (see B. S. K. Kim, 2008;Miller, 2007) that has suggested that acculturation is orthogonal toenculturation for Asian Americans, the lack of attention to accul-turation may provide a limited understanding of the diverse cul-tural contexts in which family affection is experienced by AsianAmericans.

25ASIAN AMERICAN FAMILY AFFECTION

Directions for Future Research

Further research is needed to better understand the observedconnections between parent–child relationships, Asian values gap,and family affection. First, future studies can examine whetherperceived values gap is consistent with actual values by surveyingboth students and their parents. Second, it is unclear how findingswill hold at different levels of parent and child acculturation andenculturation. Examination of these two constructs can shed lighton how affection is communicated in families comprised of inte-grated, assimilated, separated, and marginalized members (e.g.,B. S. K. Kim, 2008). Third, concepts such as masculinity, femi-ninity, and gender roles have been invoked in the discussion tointerpret and contextualize the findings. Future studies can evalu-ate these interpretations as hypotheses to better understand theimpact of gender role expectations in Asian American parent–child relationships. Finally, clinical intervention studies can beconducted to examine effective ways to facilitate affectionatebehaviors in Asian American families.

In conclusion, the present study addresses the endeavor ofidentifying factors that protect against disturbances in the parent–child relationship among Asian American college students andfinds evidence to support the protective role of family affection inattenuating the potentially harmful effects of Asian values gap.

References

Ahn, A. J., Kim, B. S. K., & Park, Y. S. (in press). Asian cultural valuesgap, cognitive flexibility, coping strategies, and parent–child conflictsamong Korean Americans. Cultural Diversity & Ethnic MinorityPsychology.

Aldwin, C., & Greenberger, E. (1987). Cultural differences in the predic-tors of depression. American Journal of Community Psychology, 15,789–813.

Blos, P. (1967). The second individuation of adolescence. The Psychoan-alytic Study of the Child, 22, 162–186.

Booth-Butterfield, M., & Booth-Butterfield, S. (1990). Conceptualizingaffect as information in communication production. Human Communi-cation Research, 16, 451–476.

Chao, R. K. (2000). The parenting of immigrant Chinese and EuropeanAmerican mothers: Relations between parenting styles, socializationgoals, and parental practices. Journal of Applied Developmental Psy-chology, 21, 233–248.

Chua, P., & Fujino, D. C. (1999). Negotiating new Asian-American mas-culinities: Attitudes and gender expectations. The Journal of Men’sStudies, 7, 391.

Chung, R. H. G. (2001). Gender, ethnicity, and acculturation in intergen-erational conflict of Asian American college students. Cultural Diversity& Ethnicity Minority Psychology, 7, 376–386.

Chung, W. (1997). Asian American children. In E. Lee (Ed.), Working withAsian Americans: A guide for clinicians. New York: Guilford Press.

Epstein, N. B. Bishop, D., Ryan, C., Miller, & Keitner, G., (1993). TheMcMaster Model View of Healthy Family Functioning. In Froma Walsh(Eds.), Normal family processes (pp. 138–160). New York: Guilford.

Erikson, E. (1959). Identity and the life cycle. Psychological Issues, 1,1–173.

Fine, M. A., Moreland, J. R., & Schwebel, A. I. (1983). Long-term effectsof divorce on parent-child relationships. Developmental Psychology, 19,703–713.

Floyd, K., & Morman, M. T. (1998). The measurement of affectionatecommunication. Communication Quarterly, 46, 144–162.

Frymier, A. B., Klopft, D. W., & Ishii, S. (1990). Japanese and Americanscompared on the affect orientation construct. Psychological Reports, 66,985–986.

Ho, M. K. (1987). Family therapy with ethnic minorities. Newbury Park,CA: Sage.

Ino, S. M., & Glicken, M. D. (2002). Understanding and teaching theethnically Asian client: A collectivist approach. Journal of Health &Social Policy, 14, 37–48.

Kim, B. S. K. (2001, August). Asian cultural values, gender, and thecounseling process with Asian American men. Paper presented at theannual meeting of the Asian American Psychological Association, SanFrancisco.

Kim, B. S. K. (2008). Acculturation and enculturation. In N. Tewari & A.Alvarez (Eds.), Asian American psychology: Current perspectives. Mah-wah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Kim, B. S. K., Atkinson, D. R., & Umemoto, D. (2001). Asian culturalvalues and the counseling process. The Counseling Psychologist, 29,570–603.

Kim, B. S. K., & Hong, S. (2004). A psychometric revision of the AsianValues Scale using the Rasch model. Measurement and Evaluation inCounseling and Development, 37, 15–27.

Kim Berg, I., & Jaya, A. (1993). Different and same: Family therapy withAsian American families. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 19,31–38.

Le, H.-N., Berenbaum, H., & Raghavan, C. (2002). Culture and alexithymia:Mean levels, correlates, and the role of parental socialization of emo-tions. Emotion, 2, 341–360.

Lee, E. (1982). A social systems approach to assessment and treatment forChinese American families. In M. McGoldrick, J. K. Pearce, & J.Giordano (Eds.), Ethnicity and family therapy (pp. 527–551). New York:Guilford.

Lee, R. M., Choe, J., Kim, G., & Ngo, V. (2000). Construction of the AsianAmerican Family Conflicts Scale. Journal of Counseling Psychology,47, 211–222.

Lee, R. M., & Liu, H.-T. T. (2001). Coping with intergenerational familyconflict: Comparison of Asian American, Hispanic, and European Ameri-can college students. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 48, 410–419.

Lin, C.-Y. C., & Fu, V. R. (1990). A comparison of child-rearing practicesamong Chinese, immigrant Chinese, and Caucasian-American parents.Child Development, 61, 429–433.

Lowinger, R. J., & Kwok, H. (2001). Parental overprotection in AsianAmerican children: A psychodynamic clinical perspective. Psychother-apy, 38, 319–330.

Miller, M. J. (2007). A bilinear multidimensional measurement modelof Asian American acculturation and enculturation: Implications forcounseling interventions. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 54,118 –131.

Portes, A. (1997). Immigration theory for a new century: Some problemsand opportunities. International Migration Review, 31, 799–825.

Pyke, K. D., & Johnson, D. L. (2003). Asian American women andracialized femininities: “Doing” gender across cultural worlds. Gender& Society, 17, 33–53.

Someya, T., Uehara, T., Kadowaki, M., Tang, S. W., & Takahashi, S.(2000). Effects of gender difference and birth order on perceived par-enting styles, measured by the EMBU scale, in Japanese two-siblingsubjects. Psychiatry and Clinical Neuroscience, 54, 77–81.

Tinto, V. (1988). Stages of student departure: Reflections on the longitu-dinal character of student leaving. The Journal of Higher Education, 59,438–455.

Uba, L. (1994). Asian Americans: Personality patterns, identity and mentalhealth. New York: Guilford.

26 PARK, VO, AND TSONG