The Swedish Brief Coparenting Relationship Scale: Psychometrics and Concurrent Validity Among Primiparous and Multiparous Fathers

Abstract

Objective This study aims to test the reliability and validity of the Swedish translation of the Brief Coparenting Relationship Scale (B‐CRS) among Swedish fathers. Background The transition to parenthood is a challenging period for many parents, but high‐quality coparenting can promote parental mental health, self‐efficacy, positive parenting skills, and children's healthy development. However, no study has validated a measure of coparenting for Swedish parents. In addition, it is unknown whether primiparous and multiparous fathers' coparenting differs. Method For this pilot study, 170 fathers of infants participated in an online survey and completed a follow‐up survey 6 months later. Results t‐Tests comparing primiparous and multiparous fathers showed no significant differences, and, therefore, these participants were grouped together for subsequent analyses. This reinforces that the coparenting relationship, is consistent and thus reflects its importance for couples to develop high‐quality coparenting with their first child. Consistent with previous research from other countries, this study demonstrates good internal consistency with the B‐CRS. Six subscales were highly correlated with the overall B‐CRS score: Coparenting Agreement, Endorsement of Partner's Parenting, Coparenting Closeness, Coparenting Support, Coparenting Undermining, and Exposure to Conflict. Better coparenting quality, as measured by the B‐CRS, was linked to lower levels of depressive symptoms and higher levels of father–infant bonding. Conclusions These results support the use of the B‐CRS in Sweden as a reliable and valid measure of coparenting. Implications Coparenting should be given greater consideration in future studies of new parent experiences and adjustment in Sweden.

Psychometric properties of the Coparenting Relationship Scale in Chinese parents

“…This discrepancy was partly in line with Portuguese and Swedish samples (Lamela & Jongenelen, 2018;Lee et al, 2021). In the Portuguese sample (Lamela & Jongenelen, 2018), division of labor did not correlate significantly with other subscales, while in the Swedish sample, division of labor showed low factor loadings for both items (Lee et al, 2021). For the division of labor subscale in the current study, neither item was reliable to the latent factor, as shown via CFA (Item 5 had a low factor loading, and Item 20 had crossloading).…”

“…Cross‐cultural studies on the coparenting relationship may enhance our understanding of family processes and coparenting dynamics in diverse cultures (Kurrien & Vo, 2004; Solmeyer et al, 2011). During the past decade, the CRS has been used in studies with samples that represent different cultures, such as studies that adapted the CRS to the Italian context (Camisasca et al, 2019), the Portuguese context (de Carvalho et al, 2018; Lamela & Jongenelen, 2018), and the Swedish context (Lee et al, 2021). For the Italian version of the CRS, Camisasca et al (2019) investigated the role of coparenting in the association between marital satisfaction and child adjustment in a sample of Italian father–mother dyads with school‐aged children.…”

Family adjustment to COVID‐19 lockdown in Italy: Parental stress, coparenting, and child externalizing behavior

“…Furthermore, the CRS‐brief scale was found to be an excellent approximation of the full CRS scale, with a correlation of 0.97 for mothers and 0.94 for fathers (Feinberg et al, 2012) and the authors suggested that it can be used to adequately assess coparenting when time is limited. Subsequent studies have confirmed good internal consistency and that all subscales were adequately or strongly correlated with CRS‐brief total scores (Lamela et al, 2016; Lee et al, 2020). Cronbach's alpha on our sample, was 0.824 both during and before lockdown, showing good internal consistency.…”

Midwives and child health nurses’ support is associated with positive coparenting for fathers of infants: A cross‐sectional analysis

“…The Brief Coparenting Relationship Scale was used to measure the coparenting relationship, and Feinberg's Coparenting Relationship Scale (Feinberg et al, 2012) seems to be relatively universal, as multiple countries have assessed its validity and have used the scale when conducting coparenting research (Carvalho et al, 2018; Favez et al, 2021; Lamela & Jongenelen, 2018; Xiao & Loke, 2021). However, while the scale is validated in Sweden (Lee et al, 2021), this measurement of coparenting may not be validated in all cultures and therefore further assessment is warranted in contexts where the scale has not been previously validated. Unfortunately, in the current study, the social support variables were single items and subsequently could not be validated.…”

“…Higher scores indicate more positive coparenting. The B‐CRS has demonstrated good reliability and validity (Feinberg et al, 2012), as well as good construct validity and internal consistency in a Swedish context (Lee et al, 2021). The two items related to the division of labour had low factor loadings in confirmatory factor analysis in the Swedish context, and therefore, only the 12‐item version was used in the current study.…”