Parental Monitoring: A Reinterpretation

Abstract

Monitoring (tracking and surveillance) of children's behavior is considered an essential parenting skill. Numerous studies show that well-monitored youths are less involved in delinquency and other normbreaking behaviors, and scholars conclude that parents should track their children more carefully. This study questions that conclusion. We point out that monitoring measures typically assess parents' knowledge but not its source, and parents could get knowledge from their children's free disclosure of information as well as their own active surveillance efforts. In our study of 703 14-year-olds in central Sweden and their parents, parental knowledge came mainly from child disclosure, and child disclosure was the source of knowledge that was most closely linked to broad and narrow measures of delinquency (normbreaking and police contact). These results held for both children's and parents' reports, for both sexes, and were independent of whether the children were exhibiting problem behavior or not. We conclude that tracking and surveillance is not the best prescription for parental behavior and that a new prescription must rest on an understanding of the factors that determine child disclosure.

Parental Knowledge of Adolescents’ Online Content and Contact Risks

“…For example, mothers were more likely to say that they had knowledge when the child perceived the communication with the mother to be more open. This is in line with the suggestion that parental knowledge is not only a product of what parents do to inform themselves but also of what children are willing to share with the parent Stattin and Kerr 2000). For fathers, there was openness of communication had no effect on self-perceived knowledge.…”

“…As such, a lack of parental knowledge has been related to a range of problematic outcomes, including substance use, low academic achievement, delinquent behavior and association with problematic peers Lippold et al 2014a, b;Racz and McMahon 2011;Stattin and Kerr 2000). The protective effect of parental knowledge in the field of adolescent problem behavior was overlooked for a long time and confused with the protective effect of parental monitoring Stattin and Kerr 2000). This error was consequential to the way in which parental monitoring tended to be operationalized, namely as what parents know about their child's daily whereabouts rather than what parents do to monitor their child's behavior.…”

“…In their initial studies on parental knowledge, Stattin and Kerr Stattin and Kerr 2000) argued that the role of the child had been overlooked and that active parental monitoring efforts (i.e., parental solicitation for information and parental control, which is operationalized as rule-setting and behavioral restrictions) are less important as compared to the information the child is willing to share about his or her activities (i.e., child disclosure). There is no consensus, however, about the relative importance of these respective knowledge-generating activities.…”

The Effects of Parental Monitoring and Communication on Adolescent Substance Use and Risky Sexual Activity: A Systematic Review

“…Fletcher, Steinberg, & Williams-Wheeler [11] later assessed these findings of Statin & Kerr [10] which ultimately state that parental monitoring has little result and is dependent on adolescent disclosure. They found this assertion by Statin & Kerr [20] to be in contradiction with the large body of literature particularly because they disregard the likelihood of adolescents' spontaneous disclosure of information. This spontaneity in disclosure is linked with parental behaviours more specifically parents exercising warmth and support towards their children which has been shown to enhance parental knowledge of adolescent activities [11].…”

“…On the contrary Statin & Kerr [20] counter the statement that parental control in fact "controls" adolescent behaviour, as it is not an action that the parent does alone but is dependent on adolescent disclosure. This means that parental monitoring cannot be effective if adolescents view this action as intrusive and may refuse to disclose their daily activities.…”