Parenting An Autism Child

ORIGINAL PAPER

Compassionate Parenting as a Key to Satisfaction, Efficacy and Meaning Among Mothers of Children with Autism

Regina Conti

Published online: 20 January 2015

� Springer Science+Business Media New York 2015

Abstract Two studies examine the role of compassionate

and self-image parenting goals in the experience of moth-

ers of children with autism. In Study 1, a comparison

sample was included. Study 1 included measures of par-

enting goals, life satisfaction, family life satisfaction, par-

enting satisfaction, and meaning in life. Study 2

incorporated a measure of parenting efficacy. Study 1

showed that mothers of children with autism were higher

than comparison mothers in compassionate parenting

goals. In both studies, compassionate parenting predicted

positive outcomes including higher parenting satisfaction

(both studies), family life satisfaction, meaning in life

(Study 1) and higher parenting efficacy (Study 2). These

studies support the notion that compassionate parenting is a

key to satisfaction for mothers of children with autism.

Keywords Autism Spectrum Disorders � Parenting goals � Compassionate goals � Self-image goals � Parenting satisfaction � Parenting efficacy

Introduction

Parents of children with autism experience significant

stress (Hayes and Watson 2013; Huang et al. 2014; Mil-

gram and Atzil 1988). Consequently, over half report

experiencing symptoms of clinical depression (Cohen and

Tsiouris 2006; DeLong 2004), a rate much higher than that

of other parents (Garfield et al. 2014). Yet, many parents of

children with autism lead satisfying and productive lives

(Faso et al. 2013; Hartley et al. 2012). A subset of these

report that the experience of having a child with autism has

refocused their parenting toward greater empathy and

compassion, and that this transformation has led to greater

meaning and personal satisfaction in their lives (Brodey

2007). These stories suggest that a motivational shift in

parenting goals may be a silver lining for parents who are

successfully coping with the stress of parenting a child with

autism.

Thus, for the purposes of this study, I have divided

parenting goals according to whether they are compas-

sionate goals and thus focused on understanding, appreci-

ating and meeting the unique needs of one’s child, or self-

image goals that are focused on how one’s child reflects on

oneself. This distinction is derived from work defining

interpersonal goals in terms of whether they are directed

toward a compassionate focus on another person’s needs or

toward constructing, enhancing and maintaining a desired

self-image (Canevello and Crocker 2011a, b, c; Canevello

et al. 2013; Crocker and Canevello 2008, 2012). Thus,

compassionate parenting goals aim to gain a view of the

world from the child’s perspective, show the child that his

or her interests and abilities are truly valued, and tailor

parenting efforts in a way that recognizes the child’s

individual needs. In contrast, self-image parenting goals

aim to shape the child’s behavior in a way that will reflect

positively on the parent, develop skills such that the child

will compare favorably with other children and direct

parenting efforts in way that brings positive recognition of

the child’s strengths and hides his or her weaknesses.

This approach toward defining parenting is similar to the

typology proposed by Hastings and Grusec (1998), who

distinguish parent-centered goals, which are likely to be

self-image oriented, from child-centered goals and rela-

tionship-centered goals, which are more likely to be

R. Conti (&) Department of Psychology, Colgate University, Hamilton,

NY 13346, USA

e-mail: [email protected]

123

J Autism Dev Disord (2015) 45:2008–2018

DOI 10.1007/s10803-015-2360-6

compassion oriented. However, because of the proposed

central role of compassion in maintaining well-being for

parents of children with autism, measuring this construct

directly was important for the present study. Children with

autism often show a complex array of sensory sensitivities,

obsessive interests, and atypical perceptions of the world

(Mash and Wolfe 2013). Because of the intensity and

unusual nature of these needs, a focus on compassion

allows parents to develop the insight that is needed to

provide effective support as the child confronts social,

cognitive and behavioral struggles. In turn, a compassion-

ate focus will support the well-being of the parent and

family by facilitating positive interactions with the child

with autism.

Previous work suggests that emphasizing compassionate

goals over self-image goals is adaptive for parents of chil-

dren with autism. Tunali and Power (2002) report an inter-

view study in which mothers of children with autism

cognitively reappraised their parenting situations in order to

cope with the uncontrollable stress associated with parent-

ing children with autism. These mothers expressed less

concern with others’ opinions of their child’s behavior (a

self-image goal), while struggling more to understand their

child (a compassionate goal) (Tunali and Power 2002).

Interestingly, in this study the degree to which mothers

prioritized understanding their children and spending a great

deal of time with their children, both compassionate goals,

predicted their self-rated life satisfaction.

Research examining the dynamics of other types of

relationships provides converging evidence for the notion

that adopting compassionate parenting goals will enhance

the well-being and family relationships among mothers of

children with autism. Canevello and Crocker’s (2011c),

Crocker and Canevello (2008, 2012) work reveals that

those pursuing compassionate goals in their friendships

report more satisfying relationships and higher levels of

well-being, as compared with those pursuing self-image

goals. They have observed a self-reinforcing process in

which compassionate goals support a positive relationship

dynamic that includes a belief that relationships grow and

improve through the resolution of difficulties (Canevello

and Crocker 2011a). Similarly, Wayment’s work examin-

ing reactions to identifying with less fortunate others shows

that those who have compassionate reaction are more likely

to feel a common bond and to experience enhanced well-

being, as compared with those who have self-protective or

self-enhancing reactions (which are self-image concerns)

(Wayment 2004, 2006; Wayment and O’Mara 2008).

These general relationship processes are pertinent to the

situation of parents who confront the difficulties associated

with autism and the realization that their children face

significant challenges. Parents who have compassionate

reactions are more likely to believe that they will grow and

improve through the challenges they confront with their

children, and are more likely to develop a warm bond with

their children.

The literature on well being among parents generally

suggests that for some, parenting can be fraught with

negative emotion and stress (Doss et al. 2009; Garfield

et al. 2014; Paulson and Bazemore 2010), while for others

it can enhance well-being and a sense of meaning in life

(Nelson et al. 2013; Nelson et al. 2014). One key factor

that may shape the emotional experience of parents is the

degree to which parents focus on compassionate or self-

image parenting goals. Self-image goals have been found

to increase anxiety and distress in roommate relationships

(Crocker et al. 2010), while compassionate goals have

been found to increase well-being (Crocker 2008). Crocker

and Canevello (2011) describe the ways that caregivers

can enhance their own well-being by compassionately

focusing on the needs of their care recipients or increase

their distress by focusing on their own needs. In a similar

fashion, parents who appreciate the perspectives of their

unique children are likely to experience more moments of

joy and satisfaction, while those focused on their self-

image will likely experience more anxiety and disap-

pointment. These effects may be even more pronounced

for parents of children with autism, because such children

often take more effort and patience to understand and can

more often display behavior that could negatively reflect

on their parents.

Just as the processes studied by Crocker and Canevello

(2008, 2012) can be self-reinforcing, the influence of par-

enting goals on parents can be strengthened by the impact

that these parenting goals have on children. The presence

of self-image goals motivates parental behavior directed

toward psychological control, which is related to such

negative outcomes in children as depression and antisocial

behavior (Barber et al. 2005). Compassionate goals might

instead promote parental support, which is related to chil-

dren’s development of social initiative and serves to protect

children and adolescents against the development of

depression. The positive impact of compassionate goals on

children will support well-being among parents, while the

negative impact of self-image goals may create stress for

parents. When children are facing developmental chal-

lenges, parental support is particularly important, and

psychological control deleterious, and so these reciprocal

effects may be marked in families with children who have

autism.

While the relationship between compassionate parenting

goals and well-being may hold for all parents, documenting

this connection is central to understanding the experience

of parents of children with autism. Because these parents

face a level of stress that goes beyond even the stress

experienced by other special needs parents (Hayes and

J Autism Dev Disord (2015) 45:2008–2018 2009

123

Watson 2013), identifying variables that predict well being

is particularly important. One might hypothesize from the

stress literature that compassionate goals are deleterious for

parents of children with autism since focusing one’s energy

on the persistent and difficult-to-meet needs of such chil-

dren could be demoralizing (Cohen 1980). However,

individual stories of parents of children with autism sug-

gest that compassionate parenting is indeed gratifying

while self-image goals are particularly maladaptive (Bro-

dey 2007). In these stories, parents described the joy of

connecting with and appreciating their unique children.

They also expressed frustration at trying to maintain a

positive view of their children and of themselves as parents

in the face of school systems that were not able to meet the

children’s needs and social circles that excluded their

children because of their behavioral differences and

developmental delays.

While the current literature on parenting a child with

autism highlights the stress and limitations of this experi-

ence (Beer et al. 2013; Hayes and Watson 2013; Huang

et al. 2014; Johnson et al. 2011; Milgram and Atzil 1988;

Moh and Magiati 2012; Silva and Schalock 2012; Solomon

2012; Tunali and Power 2002), the present work aims to

investigate whether having a child with autism can also

bring rewards in the form of a greater focus on compas-

sionate goals. Indeed, the literature on stress-related growth

suggests that difficult, even traumatic, experiences can

prompt positive change (King and Hicks 2007). This lit-

erature has explored the experiences of parents of children

with special needs including Down Syndrome (King and

Patterson 2000; King et al. 2000) and Attention Deficit and

Hyperactivity Disorder (Finzi-Dottan et al. 2011), although

positive implications of parenting a child with autism have

yet to be documented.

Studying the role of parenting goals among the parents

of children with autism is also important because the

experience of these parents may lead them toward a more

compassionate approach toward parenting. By loving a

child with atypical needs, parents may become aware of the

rewards inherent in meeting those needs. Such insight may

create more strongly held compassionate parenting goals.

Likewise, raising a child who is not easily compared with

other children might lead parents to abandon self-image

goals. Thus, I report two studies that examine the rela-

tionships among compassionate and self-image parenting

goals and feelings of satisfaction, efficacy and meaning

among mothers of children with autism.

Study 1

Study 1 examined the relationships between compassionate

and self-image parenting goals and satisfaction among

parents of children with autism and a comparison sample of

parents raising only typically developing children, by

administering questionnaires measuring these constructs.

Several different types of satisfaction were investigated:

overall life satisfaction, family life satisfaction, parental

self-satisfaction, and meaning in life. I hypothesized that

compassionate parenting goals would be higher among

parents of children with autism, while self-image goals

would be lower, as compared with the comparison sample.

I hypothesized that compassionate parenting goals would

positively predict all measures of satisfaction among par-

ents, while self-image goals would negatively predict sat-

isfaction measures.

Methods

Participants and Procedure

Parents of children with autism were recruited using the

Interactive Autism Network (IAN Research, 2008). IAN is

an internet-based project, sponsored by the Kennedy Krieger

Institute, which assists researchers by maintaining a research

database of families of people with autism. Of the 150 IAN

parents invited, 76 agreed to participate in the study. Of

these, 74 were mothers and 2 were fathers, because of the

small number of fathers, only mothers were included in the

analyses. The mothers’ average age was 44.1 years and all

had at least one child with an Autism Spectrum Diagnosis

who was currently between the ages of 5 and 18. They were

primarily Caucasian, with 1 African American, 1 Asian

American/Pacific Islander, and 2indicating ‘‘other race.’’ All

had graduated high school, 22 % completed a 4-year college

degree and 21 % had attended graduate school.

A comparison sample of parents was obtained using the

Study Response online data collection service provided

through Syracuse University. By using a prescreening

questionnaire, Study Response was able to administer my

questionnaire to 250 persons enrolled in Study Response

who were parents of between 1 and 5 typically developing

children with at least 1 child aged 5–18 years (to match the

family structures in our IAN sample). Of these, 214 pro-

vided complete data. In this sample, there were 168 fathers

and 46 mothers. Because of the small number of fathers

from the IAN sample, only data from the mothers were

used. These mothers reported an average age of 36.5 years.

The comparison sample was primarily white with 5 African

Americans, 5 Latinas, 2 Asian Americans/Pacific Islanders,

and 1 Native American. Ninety-nine percent completed

high school, 33 % completed college and 20 % attended

graduate school.

Both samples responded to the online questionnaire

described below and were paid $5 to thank them for their

participation. The IAN sample was also asked to write a

2010 J Autism Dev Disord (2015) 45:2008–2018

123

narrative account of their experiences with their child with

autism, as part of a separate study.

Measures

The online questionnaire included the Satisfaction with Life

Scale (SWLS; Diener et al. 1985) a 5-item instrument that

measures global estimates of life satisfaction (sample item:

‘‘In most ways my life is close to my ideal’’), the Meaning in

Life Questionnaire (MLQ; Steger et al. 2006) a 10-item scale

which yields scores for having meaning (sample item: ‘‘I

understand my life’s meaning’’ and seeking meaning in life

(sample item: ‘‘I am looking for something that makes my life

feel meaningful’’), and the Kansas Family Life Satisfaction

Scale (KFLS; Schumm et al. 1986) a 5-item measure of sat-

isfactionwithfamilylifeoverall;specificaspectsoffamilylife

are measured with individual items (sample item: ‘‘How sat-

isfied are you with your family life?’’). For this study, I added

anitemtothe KFLSassessingthe degreetowhich participants

were satisfied with themselves as parents: ‘‘How satisfied are

you with yourself as a parent?’’ These are all validated self-

report instruments that have been shown to have adequate

reliability in prior research and in the present sample (SWLS:

Cronbach’s a = .91; MLQ having: Cronbach’s a = .88 MLQ seeking: .92; KFLS: Cronbach’s a = .85).

Also included was the Parenting Goal Questionnaire

(PGQ) that was developed specifically for use in this study.

Items were developed based on Crocker and Canavello’s

(2008) compassionate and self-image goals questionnaire.

They were revised to refer specifically to the goals each

mother had in raising all her children (not only the child with

ASD). The PGQ starts with the stem ‘‘In the past month, in

your role as a parent, how often did you want to or try to…’’ Parents are then asked to indicate the frequency of working

toward each of 24 goal statements on a 5-point scale (never,

rarely, sometimes, often, always). Half (12) were designed to

measure compassionate parenting goals and half were

designed to measure self-image parenting goals. Example

compassion items include: ‘‘have compassion for your chil-

d(ren)’s mistakes or weaknesses?’’ and ‘‘learn more about

how your child(ren) see(s) the world?’’ Example self-image

items include: ‘‘get your child(ren) to behave in a way that

make(s) you proud?’’ and ‘‘provide your child(ren) with

opportunities that will bring recognition?’’ The internal con-

sistencies of these scales were acceptable, for compassion and

self-image scales Cronbach’s a = .85 and .86, respectively.

Results

t Tests

Table 1 displays means and standard deviations of the central

variables of interest for mothers of children with and without

autism. I conducted t tests to determine whether the two

groups of parents differed in their reports of satisfaction,

meaning, and goals as parents; see Table 1 for t values, con-

fidence intervals and significance levels. Results revealed that

the comparison sample reported significantly higher levels of

life satisfaction, and satisfaction with themselves as parents,

while mothers of children with autism reported higher

endorsement of compassionate goals as parents. While the

comparison sample was higher on seeking meaning in life and

self-image goals, these differences did not reach statistical

significance. The two samples weresimilar onreported family

life satisfaction and having meaning in life. These compari-

sons were repeated controlling for age, using analysis of

covariance,becauseage wassubstantiallydifferentforthetwo

samples, but because the results were the same, I do not

include these additional analyses here.

Correlations

Table 2 shows the correlations among the main study

variables. Satisfaction variables were substantially corre-

lated with one another. Having and seeking meaning in life

were negatively correlated. Compassion and self-image

goal endorsement were positively correlated. Both com-

passion goals and self-image goals were positively corre-

lated with family life satisfaction and parental self-

satisfaction, although neither was related to overall life

satisfaction. Having meaning in life was related to all three

measures of satisfaction and to compassionate goals, while

seeking meaning was related to self-image goals.

Regressions Predicting Satisfaction

Table 3 summarizes regression analyses predicting satis-

faction variables from compassionate and self-image goals.

Age and sample were also included in the analyses as

control variables. Initially, all regression analyses also

included the interaction between sample and each goal

orientation and the three-way interaction of compas-

sion 9 self-image 9 sample, but because these effects did

not emerge as statistically significant they were dropped

from the models reported here.

The model predicting life satisfaction was statistically

significant overall, although the only individual predictor

emerging as significant was sample, with mothers from the

comparison sample reporting higher life satisfaction than

mothers of children with autism. The model predicting

family life satisfaction was also significant; in this analysis

only compassionate goals emerged as a significant positive

predictor. The model predicting parental self-satisfaction

was significant overall and both compassionate goals and

sample emerged as significant positive predictors (the

comparison sample reported higher self-satisfaction).

J Autism Dev Disord (2015) 45:2008–2018 2011

123

Table 1 Study 1: Comparison of key variables for mothers with and without a child with autism

Variable Mothers of children with autism (n = 74)

M (SD)

Comparison sample (n = 46)

M (SD)

t(118) 95 % CI of

M difference

Life satisfaction

Overall 3.88 (1.51) 4.83 (1.51) -3.35** [-1.51, 3.88]

Family life satisfaction 4.79 (1.32) 5.03 (1.38) -.97 [-.74, .26]

Parental self-satisfaction 4.91 (1.35) 5.46 (1.25) -2.25* [-1.04, -.07]

Meaning in life

Having meaning 5.05 (1.30) 5.21 (1.32) -.66 [-.65, .33]

Seeking meaning in life 3.88 (1.53) 4.41 (1.62) -1.81 [-1.11, .05]

Parenting goal orientation

Compassion 4.19 (.45) 3.92 (.60) 2.79** [.08, .46]

Self-image 3.35 (.55) 3.51 (.71) -1.46 [-40, .06]

* p \ .05; ** p \ .01

Table 2 Study 1: Correlations among variables (N = 120)

* p \ .05; ** p \ .01

Variable 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Life satisfaction

1. Overall – .69** .62** .50** -.17 .03 .11

2. Family life satisfaction – .81** .59** -.14 .35** .25**

3. Parental

self-satisfaction

– .63** -.07 .32** .29**

Meaning in life

4. Having meaning – -.38** .38** .14

5. Seeking meaning in life – -.08 .18*

Parenting goal orientation

6. Compassion – .49**

7. Self-image –

Table 3 Study 1: Multiple regression analyses predicting

life satisfaction variables from

compassion and self-image

goals controlling for age and

sample

* p \ .05; ** p \ .01

Variables R 2

B (SE) 95 % CI

Dependent variable: overall life satisfaction .10*

Predictors

Compassion .30 (.32) [-.34, .94]

Self-image .06 (.27) [-.47, .60]

Age -.02 (.02) [-.05, .02]

Sample .90** (.34) [.22, 1.58]

Dependent variable: Family Life Satisfaction .16**

Predictors

Compassion .96** (.27) [.43, 1.49]

Self-image .09 (.22) [-.35, .54]

Age .00 (.02) [-.03, .03]

Sample .50 (.29) [-.06, 1.06]

Dependent variable: parental self-satisfaction .19**

Predictors

Compassion .88** (.26) [-.37, 1.40]

Self-image .18 (.22) [-.25, .61]

Age .01 (.02) [-.03, .04]

Sample .80** (.28) [.25, 1.35]

2012 J Autism Dev Disord (2015) 45:2008–2018

123

Regressions Predicting Meaning in Life

Table 4 summarizes two regression analyses predicting

having and seeking meaning in life from compassionate

and self-image goals, with age and sample included as

control variables. Both models were significant. Having

meaning was positively predicted by compassionate goals

and sample (with comparison mothers higher in meaning),

while seeking meaning was positively predicted by self-

image goals.

Discussion

As predicted, compassionate parenting goals were more

strongly endorsed by mothers of children with autism.

Compassionate goal endorsement positively predicted

family life satisfaction, parental self-satisfaction and hav-

ing meaning in life. These results support my hypotheses

and are encouraging in that they suggest that the experience

of having a child with autism may strengthen compas-

sionate parenting goals, which in turn support more satis-

fying relationships and a sense of meaning among mothers.

This pattern adds to the considerable literature showing

that compassionate goals support satisfaction and growth in

relationships (Canevello and Crocker 2011a, c; Canevello

et al. 2013; Crocker and Canevello 2012). These findings

also make an important contribution to the literature on

parenting children with autism, by identifying a process

that allows parents to redirect their parenting in a way that

leads to satisfying relationships and a sense of personal

meaning.

Mothers of children with autism did, however, report

feeling less satisfied with their lives overall and with

themselves as parents, as compared with parents of only

typically developing children. These differences may be

due to the considerable stress that parents of children with

autism experience and the sacrifices that they are forced to

make in order to meet the needs of their children (Hayes

and Watson 2013; Huang et al. 2014; Johnson et al. 2011).

These findings must be interpreted with caution because

the comparison sample was small and somewhat younger

than the sample of mothers of children with autism. At

least one previous study did not find differences in life

satisfaction between mothers of children with autism and

mothers of only typically developing children (Tunali and

Power 2002). Thus, additional work is needed to determine

the degree to which parenting a child with autism under-

mines satisfaction with life and parenting.

The difference in self-image goal endorsement between

the two samples was not statistically significant. Self-image

goal orientation also did not predict satisfaction measures,

although it did predict seeking meaning in life. This result

is interesting in that it suggests a connection between self-

image and the insecure feeling of seeking a sense of pur-

pose in life that is consistent with findings related to self-

image goals in previous research (Canevello et al. 2013).

While the connections observed in Study 1 were inter-

esting, they are limited by the very brief (1 item) measure

of parenting satisfaction that was used (Miller et al. 1985).

While mothers of children with autism did not report

overall lower family life satisfaction, they were signifi-

cantly lower in their reported satisfaction with themselves

as parents. Thus, Study 2 was undertaken in order to more

carefully examine the relationships between parenting

goals and parenting outcomes among mothers of children

with autism.

Study 2

Study 2 tapped parenting experience more broadly, by

measuring both parenting efficacy and parenting satisfac-

tion using Johnston and Mash’s (1989) Parenting Sense of

Competence Scale. Most previous research suggests that

Table 4 Study 1: Multiple regression analyses predicting

meaning in life variables from

compassion and self-image

goals controlling for age and

sample

* p \ .05; ** p \ .01

Variables R 2

B (SE) 95 % CI

Dependent variable: having meaning .19**

Predictors

Compassion 1.24** (.26) [.73, 1.74]

Self-image -.28 (.21) [-.71, .14]

Age -.02 (.02) [-.01, .05]

Sample .67** (.27) [.14, 1.21]

Dependent variable: seeking meaning .08*

Predictors

Compassion -.59 (.33) [-1.24, .07]

Self-image .69* (.27) [.15, 1.23]

Age .02 (.02) [-.06, .02]

Sample .11 (.35) [-.58, .81]

J Autism Dev Disord (2015) 45:2008–2018 2013

123

compassionate and self-image goals are related to affective

components of relationship outcomes (Canevello and

Crocker 2011c; Canevello et al. 2013; Crocker and

Canevello 2008), while more recent work suggests that

these goal orientations may also impact more instrumental

aspects of relationship functioning such as the belief that

relationships can be changed (Canevello and Crocker

2011a; Niiya et al. 2013). Study 2 sought to investigate

whether compassionate parenting goals would predict both

the affective dimension of parenting satisfaction and the

instrumental dimension of parenting efficacy, or perceived

parental competence.

Study 2 used the same on-line questionnaire method-

ology to administer measures of self-image and compas-

sionate parenting goals and parenting satisfaction and

efficacy to a sample of parents of children with autism.

Based on the findings of Study 1, I hypothesized that

compassionate goal orientation would predict both par-

enting variables. Self-image goal orientation was

hypothesized to be a negative predictor of the parenting

variables.

Methods

Participants

For Study 2, I recruited 129 mothers through the Interactive

Autism Network (IAN; ianproject.org). Of the 150 IAN

parents who had a child with ASD aged 4 through 18 who

were contacted, 129 mothers and 1 father chose to partic-

ipate (only mothers were included in analyses). The par-

ticipants were compensated with a $5 Amazon gift card for

their participation.

The mothers ranged in age from 25 to 56, M = 41.3,

SD = 6.01. There were 119 white participants, 5 Latino

participants, 2 Asian American participants, and 3 who did

not report their race/ethnicity. Of the respondents, 116

were married, 1 was living with her partner, 8 were

divorced, and 4 classified themselves as ‘‘other.’’ The

children with ASD consisted of 95 males and 34 females.

These children ranged in age from 4 to 18 years,

M = 10.69, SD = 3.26. The diagnoses of these children

consisted of 39 with High Functioning Autism/Asperger’s

Syndrome (HFA/AS), 48 with Autistic Disorder, 27 with

Pervasive Developmental Disorder-Not Otherwise Speci-

fied (PDD-NOS), and 15 with ASD (no further

specification).

Materials and Procedure

Participants were invited to complete a questionnaire ask-

ing for background information, and the scales described

below.

The Parenting Sense of Competence Scale (Johnston

and Mash 1989) was used to measure parenting efficacy

and satisfaction. This scale presents a list of 17 statements,

and asks participants to rate the accuracy of each on a six-

point scale from ‘‘strongly agree’’ to ‘‘strongly disagree.’’

A sample efficacy item is ‘‘The problems of taking care of

a child are easy to solve once you know how your actions

affect your child, an understanding I have acquired,’’ and a

sample satisfaction item is ‘‘Even though being a parent

could be rewarding, I was frustrated with my children

during this time period’’ (reverse scored). The Parenting

Sense of Competence Scale demonstrated internal consis-

tency of .75 for the Satisfaction Scale and .76 for the

Efficacy Scale in prior research (Johnston and Mash 1989),

and in the present sample, Cronbach’s alphas = .78 and

.75 for Efficacy and Satisfaction, respectively.

The PGQ was again used. For this sample the PGQ

showed high reliability: Cronbach’s a = .83 and .72 for compassionate and self-image goals, respectively.

1

Results

Parenting Goals Comparison with Study 1

Mean scores on compassionate and self-image goal scales

obtained in Study 2 were similar to those for the mothers of

children with autism in Study 1 and thus showed the same

pattern of difference with the comparison sample from

Study 1. In order to confirm that the mothers of children

with autism in this sample more strongly endorsed com-

passionate goals, but not self-image goals as compared

with mothers of only typically developing children, two

1-way analyses of variance (ANOVA) were conducted to

compare mean compassionate and self-image goal scores

across the three samples. The ANOVA for compassionate

goals was highly significant, F(2,246) = 12.67, p \ .000. Bonferroni comparisons showed that the Study 2 mothers

more strongly endorsed compassionate goals than did

mothers from the Study 1 comparison sample, M diff = .41

CI [.21, .60], p \ .000, but not the mothers of children with autism from Study 1, M diff = .07 CI [-.03, .30], ns. The

ANOVA for self-image goals was not significant,

F(2,246) = 1.75, ns.

1 This questionnaire also asked parents to think back and respond to

these items according to how they felt when they had only 1 child, in

order to examine how the variables of interest may have changed with

the introduction of a child with autism for families who had their child

with autism second (n = 35). Because of the small number of such

families, these changes are not included in the analyses reported here.

2014 J Autism Dev Disord (2015) 45:2008–2018

123

Correlations

Table 5 shows the correlations among the Study 2 vari-

ables. Parenting satisfaction and efficacy were positively

correlated with one another. Again, endorsement of com-

passionate and self-image goals were positively correlated.

Both compassionate goals and self-image goals were pos-

itively correlated with parenting efficacy, while only

compassionate goals were related to parenting satisfaction.

Regressions Predicting Satisfaction

Table 6 summarizes regression analyses predicting par-

enting satisfaction and efficacy variables from compas-

sionate and self-image goals. Age was also included in

the analyses as a control variable. The model predicting

parenting satisfaction was statistically significant overall,

and compassionate goals emerged as a significant posi-

tive predictor. The model predicting parenting efficacy

was also significant with a stronger effect size; again

only compassion goals emerged as a significant positive

predictor.

Discussion

These results confirm and extend the findings from Study 1.

Similar mean levels of self-image and compassionate par-

enting goal scores were observed across the two samples of

mothers of children with autism, and mothers of children

with autism from Study 2 were higher on compassionate

parenting goals than were comparison mothers. Again in

Study 2, compassionate parenting goals predicted positive

parenting outcomes. The effect for parenting satisfaction

matched that observed in Study 1; mothers who more

strongly endorsed compassionate parenting goals were

more satisfied with themselves as parents. In addition a

positive relationship was observed between compassionate

parenting goals and parenting efficacy. These findings

suggest that compassionate parenting goals affect the

instrumental dimension of mothers’ relationships with their

children with autism as well as the affective dimension of

these relationships. Adopting compassionate parenting

goals may lead mothers to understand their children better.

This deeper understanding may lead mothers to feel more

confidence in their parenting ability. These findings build

nicely on the findings of Study 1 in that they show that a

compassionate parenting goal orientation is related not

only to feelings of satisfaction and meaning, but also to

feelings of efficacy. Building a sense of efficacy is

important in this population, in that feeling effective

encourages mothers to stay engaged in the time-consuming

efforts required to successfully parent children with autism.

General Discussion

These studies are the first to investigate the impact of

parenting goals among parents of children with autism.

Although there is a large body of research on parenting

style (Baumrind 2013; Coplan et al. 2002), there is less

work that explores parenting motivation (Hastings and

Grusec 1998). While stress has been extensively studied

among parents of children with autism (Abidin et al. 2006;

Hayes and Watson 2013; Milgram and Atzil 1988), this

study adds to the smaller literature on satisfaction and well-

being in this population. Identifying factors that promote

well-being and satisfying family relationships is especially

important for these mothers, given the challenges they face

(Faso et al. 2013). The studies reported here show that

compassionate parenting goals predict positive parenting

outcomes including family and parenting satisfaction,

parenting efficacy and meaning in life. These studies also

showed a stronger endorsement of compassionate parenting

goals among mothers of children with autism as compared

with mothers of only typically developing children, while

overall life satisfaction and parenting satisfaction was

lower as compared with comparison mothers.

These findings suggest that building on compassionate

parenting goals may be an effective means of buffering

stress and boosting well-being among parents of children

with autism. Although a strengthening of compassion may

happen naturally to some degree, supporting the develop-

ment of compassionate parenting goals would seem a

fruitful avenue for improving the overall functioning of

mothers of children with autism. Indeed, efforts have

already been made along these lines through mindful par-

enting interventions that promote a compassionate

approach (Benn et al. 2012). Mindful parenting brings a

moment-to-moment awareness to parent child interactions

and encourages active listening, emotional awareness and

acceptance of the child (Duncan e al. 2009). This approach

has been shown to be effective in reducing stress and

depressive symptoms among parents of children with aut-

ism (Beer et al. 2013). This finding further supports the

Table 5 Study 2: Correlations among variables (N = 129)

Variable 1 2 3 4

Parenting outcomes

1. Satisfaction – .40** .31** .15

2. Efficacy – .52** .34**

Parenting goal orientation

3. Compassion – .43**

4. Self-image –

* p \ .05; ** p \ .01

J Autism Dev Disord (2015) 45:2008–2018 2015

123

notion that mindfully working toward compassionate par-

enting goals is a key to coping with parenting a child with

autism.

In order to become more mindful, mothers can set aside

time each day to listen to each of their children with their

full attention (Duncan et al. 2009). This listening goes

beyond simply hearing the words spoken by the child to

carefully observing the child’s body language and emo-

tional expression and so can be carried out with children

regardless of their ability to speak. Mindful parenting

requires self-regulation (Duncan et al. 2009). When nega-

tive emotions are felt toward one’s child, the parent is

encouraged to pause and consider the child’s perspective

and the best parenting strategy rather than reacting auto-

matically (Dumas 2005). Mindful parents can work toward

compassionate parenting goals by thinking through moti-

vated action plans (MAPs, Dumas). A mother who wants to

be more constructive in the way she encourages her child to

complete his homework can identify specific steps for

making homework time distraction-free and pleasant. A

mother who is working on appreciating her child’s positive

qualities might develop a plan to give her child a sincere

compliment each evening before bed. MAPs will be most

effective if they are specific, promotion focused (as

opposed to avoidance focused), and proximal (Gollwitzer

1999).

These findings also extend the body of research inves-

tigating compassionate and self-image goal orientations

(see Crocker and Canevello 2012) by showing that these

goal orientations can be meaningfully applied to parenting.

Within the present context, compassionate goals seem to be

more important in promoting positive parenting outcomes

than are self-image goals. This asymmetry is surprising, in

that the social comparison processes inherent in pursuing

self-image goals would seem to make them particularly

deleterious for parents who are adjusting to the reality of

having a child who may not meet many of the image-

orientated expectations that parents generally have for

children. While it would seem to be adaptive for parents to

reduce their focus on these expectations, the present find-

ings emphasize that what is more important is investing

energy in understanding and valuing the individuality of

each child.

In addition, these findings will add to our growing

understanding of the potential for growth and meaning that

emerges from the challenges that shape human lives (King

and Hicks 2007). While stress-related growth, ego devel-

opment and maturity have been documented in parents of

children with other special needs (Finzi-Dottan et al. 2011;

King and Patterson 2000; King et al. 2000), the experience

of parenting a child with autism has been painted as par-

ticularly bleak (Solomon 2012). By suggesting that the

autism parenting experience has the potential to build

compassion in parents, which supports a sense of well-

being and meaning in life, the current studies open the door

to the possibility of positive change through this

experience.

While the findings reported here are important and

interesting, there are methodological limitations to this

work. These studies surveyed parents at one point in time

and used correlational designs, thus opening the possibili-

ties of reverse causality and third variable explanations.

The comparison sample was smaller and less similar

demographically than would be desirable. Ideally, in the

future these questions will be studied longitudinally using a

larger and more diverse participant population.

Cultural background, religiosity and socioeconomic

circumstances have been shown to influence parenting

style and practices (Chaudhuri et al. 2009, Weyand et al.

2013). These differences are important to examine among

parents of children with autism because the challenges

associated with raising a child with a developmental dis-

ability can negatively impact parenting style within par-

ticular cultural contexts (Nakajima et al. 2012). A fruitful

avenue for future research is to examine the implications of

compassionate and self-image parenting goals for families

with different sets of cultural and religious assumptions

and with various economic situations.

Table 6 Study 2: multiple regression analyses predicting

parenting satisfaction and

efficacy from compassion and

self-image goals controlling for

age

* p \ .05; ** p \ .01

Variables R 2

B (SE) 95 % CI

Dependent variable: parenting satisfaction .13**

Predictors

Compassion .58** (.18) [.23, .94]

Self-image .04 (.15) [-.26, .34]

Age .03 (.01) [.00, .05]

Dependent variable: parenting efficacy .26**

Predictors

Compassion .93** (.17) [.60, 1.26]

Self-image .23 (.14) [-.05, .51]

Age .00 (.01) [-.02, .02]

2016 J Autism Dev Disord (2015) 45:2008–2018

123

Although the current research is limited in scope, the

studies reported here represent progress toward under-

standing the complex and potentially rewarding experi-

ences of parents of children with autism. By going beyond

the challenges of the parenting experience to document the

positive impact of compassionate parenting goals, these

studies bring to light a way in which parents can learn a

critical life lesson from their children with autism, and in

doing so can grow in their acceptance and appreciation for

their families’ unique experience.

Acknowledgments I am grateful for the assistance of my students Mai Duong, Caitlyn Lucas, Elizabeth Paulino, Shaterra Redd and

Kristen Stonehill, as well as Connie Anderson and Alison R. Marvin

of the IAN Project who facilitated the data collection for the studies

reported here and to Eugene Fodor, Anne Fontana, William J. Porta,

Ellen Kuhl Repetto and Rebecca Shiner Jennifer Tomlinson and an

anonymous reviewer for their comments on an earlier version of this

manuscript. This research was supported by a grant from Colgate

University’s Research Council.

References

Abidin, R., Flens, J. R., & Austin, W. G. (2006). The Parenting Stress

Index. In R. P. Archer (Ed.), Forensic uses of clinical assessment

instruments (pp. 297–328). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum

Associates Publishers.

Barber, B. K., Stolz, H. E., & Olsen, J. A. (2005). Parental support,

psychological control, and behavioral control: Assessing rele-

vance across time, culture, and method. Monographs of the

Society for Research in Child Development, 70(4), 58–72.

Baumrind, D. (2013). Authoritative parenting revisited: History and

current status. In R. E. Larzelere, A. S. Morris, & A. W. Harrist

(Eds.), Authoritative parenting: Synthesizing nurturance and

discipline for optimal child development (pp. 11–34). Washing-

ton, DC: American Psychological Association.

Beer, M., Ward, L., & Moar, K. (2013). The relationship between

mindful parenting and distress in parents of children with an

autism spectrum disorder. Mindfulness, 4(2), 102–112.

Benn, R., Akiva, T., Arel, S., & Roeser, R. W. (2012). Mindfulness

training effects for parents and educators of children with special

needs. Developmental Psychology, 48(5), 1476–1487.

Brodey, D. (2007). The elephant in the playroom: Ordinary parents

write intimately and honestly about the extraordinary highs and

heartbreaking lows of raising kids with special needs. New

York, NY: Hudson Street Press.

Canevello, A., & Crocker, J. (2011a). Changing relationship growth

belief: Intrapersonal and interpersonal consequences of compas-

sionate goals. Personal Relationships, 18(3), 370–391.

Canevello, A., & Crocker, J. (2011b). Interpersonal goals and close

relationship processes: Potential links to health. Social and

Personality Psychology Compass, 5(6), 346–358.

Canevello, A., & Crocker, J. (2011c). Interpersonal goals, others’

regard for the self, and self-esteem: The paradoxical conse-

quences of self-image and compassionate goals. European

Journal of Social Psychology, 41(4), 422–434.

Canevello, A., Granillo, M. T., & Crocker, J. (2013). Predicting

change in relationship insecurity: The roles of compassionate

and self-image goals. Personal Relationships, 20(4), 587–618.

Chaudhuri, J. H., Easterbrooks, M. A., & Davis, C. R. (2009). The

relation between emotional availability and parenting style:

Cultural and Economic factors in a diverse sample of young

mothers. Parenting Science and Practice, 9, 277–299.

Cohen, S. (1980). Aftereffects of stress on human performance and

social behavior: A review of research and theory. Psychological

Bulletin, 88(1), 82–108.

Cohen, I. L., & Tsiouris, J. A. (2006). Maternal recurrent mood

disorders and high-functioning autism. Journal of Autism and

Developmental Disorders, 36(8), 1077–1088.

Coplan, R. J., Hastings, P. D., Lagacé-Séguin, D. G., & Moulton, C.

E. (2002). Authoritative and authoritarian mothers’ parenting

goals, attributions, and emotions across different childrearing

contexts. Parenting: Science and Practice, 2(1), 1–26.

Crocker, J. (2008). From egosystem to ecosystem: Implications for

learning, relationships, and well-being. In H. Wayment & J.

Brauer (Eds.), Transcending self-interest: Psychological explo-

rations of the quiet ego (pp. 63–72). Washington, DC: American

Psychological Association.

Crocker, J., & Canevello, A. (2008). Creating and undermining social

support in communal relationships: The role of compassionate

and self-image goals. Journal of Personality and Social

Psychology, 95(3), 555–575.

Crocker, J., & Canevello, A. (2011). Egosystem and ecosystem:

Motivational perspectives on caregiving. In S. E. Brown, M.

Brown, & L. Penner (Eds.), Self-interest and beyond: Toward a

new understanding of human caregiving (pp. 211–223). Oxford:

Oxford University Press.

Crocker, J., & Canevello, A. (2012). Consequences of self-image and

compassionate goals. In P. Devine & A. Plant (Eds.), Advances

in experimental social psychology (Vol. 45, pp. 229–277). San

Diego, CA: Academic Press.

Crocker, J., Canevello, A., Breines, J. G., & Flynn, H. (2010).

Interpersonal goals and change in anxiety and dysphoria in first-

semester college students. Journal of Personality and Social

Psychology, 98, 1009–1024.

DeLong, R. (2004). Autism and familial major mood disorder: Are

they related? The Journal of Neuropsychiatry and Clinical

Neurosciences, 16(2), 199–213.

Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The

satisfaction with life scale. Journal of Personality Assessment,

49, 71–75.

Doss, B. D., Rhoades, G. K., Stanely, S. M., & Markman, H. J.

(2009). The effect of the transition to parenthood on relationship

quality: An 8-year prospective study. Journal of Personality and

Social Psychology, 96(3), 601–619.

Dumas, J. E. (2005). Mindfulness-based parent training: Strategies to

lessen the grip of automaticity in families with disruptive

children. Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology,

34(4), 779–791.

Duncan, L. G., Coatsworth, J. D., & Greenberg, M. T. (2009). A

model of mindful parenting: Implications for parent–child

relationships and prevention research. Clinical Child and Family

Psychology Review, 12(3), 255–270.

Faso, D.J., Neal-Beevers, A., & Carlson,C.L.(2013). Vicarious futurity,

hope, and well-being in parents of children with autism spectrum

disorder. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 7(2), 288–297.

Finzi-Dottan, R., Triwitz, Y. S., & Golubchik, P. (2011). Predictors of

stress-related growth in parents of children with ADHD.

Research in Developmental Disabilities, 32(2), 510–519.

Garfield, C. F., Duncan, G., Rutsohn, J., McDade, T. W., Adam, E.

K., Coley, R. L., & Chase-Lansdale, P. L. (2014). A longitudinal

study of paternal mental health during transition to fatherhood as

young adults. Pediatrics, 133, 836–843.

Gollwitzer, P. M. (1999). Implementation intentions: Strong effects of

simple plans. American Psychologist, 54, 493–503.

Hartley, S. L., Barker, E. T., Baker, J. K., Seltzer, M. M., &

Greenberg, J. S. (2012). Marital satisfaction and life

J Autism Dev Disord (2015) 45:2008–2018 2017

123

circumstances of grown children with autism across 7 years.

Journal of Family Psychology, 26(5), 688–697.

Hastings, P. D., & Grusec, J. E. (1998). Parenting goals as organizers

of responses to parent–child disagreement. Developmental

Psychology, 34(3), 465–479.

Hayes, S. A., & Watson, S. L. (2013). The impact of parenting stress:

A meta-analysis of studies comparing the experience of parent-

ing stress in parents of children with and without autism

spectrum disorder. Journal of Autism and Developmental

Disorders, 43(3), 629–642.

Huang, C., Yen, H., Tseng, M., Tung, L., Chen, Y., & Chen, K.

(2014). Impacts of autistic behaviors, emotional and behavioral

problems on parenting stress in caregivers of children with

autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 44,

1383–1390.

Johnson, N., Frenn, M., Feetham, S., & Simpson, P. (2011). Autism

spectrum disorder: Parenting stress, family functioning and

health-related quality of life. Families, Systems, and Health,

29(3), 232–252.

Johnston, C., & Mash, E. J. (1989). A measure of parenting

satisfaction and efficacy. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology,

18, 167–175.

King, L. A., & Hicks, J. A. (2007). Whatever happened to ‘what

might have been’? regrets, happiness, and maturity. American

Psychologist, 62(7), 625–636.

King, L. A., & Patterson, C. (2000). Reconstructing life goals after the

birth of a child with Down Syndrome: Finding happiness and

growing. International Journal of Rehabilitation and Health,

5(1), 17–30.

King, L. A., Scollon, C. K., Ramsey, C., & Williams, T. (2000).

Stories of life transition: Subjective well-being and ego devel-

opment in parents of children with Down Syndrome. Journal of

Research in Personality, 34(4), 509–536.

Mash, E. J., & Wolfe, D. A. (2013). Disorders of childhood and

adolescence. In G. Stricker, T. A. Widiger, & I. B. Weiner

(Eds.), Handbook of psychology: Clinical Psychology (Vol. 8,

pp. 19–72). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

Milgram, N. A., & Atzil, M. (1988). Parenting stress in raising autistic

children. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 18(3),

415–424.

Miller, I. W., Epstein, N. B., Bishop, D. S., & Keitner, G. I. (1985).

The McMaster family assessment device: Reliability and valid-

ity. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 11(4), 345–356.

Moh, T. A., & Magiati, I. (2012). Factors associated with parental

stress and satisfaction during the process of diagnosis of children

with autism spectrum disorders. Research in Autism Spectrum

Disorders, 6(1), 293–303.

Nakajima, S., Okada, R., Matsuoka, M., Iori, T., Masafumi, O., &

Masatsugu, T. (2012). Parenting styles of parents of children

with developmental disabilities. Japanese Journal of Develop-

mental Psychology, 23(3), 264–275.

Nelson, S. K., Kushlev, K., English, T., Dunn, E. W., & Lyubomirsky,

S. (2013). In defense of parenthood: Children are associated with

more joy than misery. Psychological Science, 24(1), 3–10.

Nelson, S. K., Kushlev, K., & Lyubomirsky, S. (2014). The pains and

pleasures of parenting: When, why and how is parenthood

associated with more or less well-being. Psychological Bulletin,

140(3), 846–895.

Niiya, Y., Crocker, J., & Mischkowski, D. (2013). Compassionate and

self-image goals in the United States and Japan. Journal of

Cross-Cultural Psychology, 44(3), 389–405.

Paulson, J. F., & Bazemore, S. D. (2010). Prenatal and postpartum

depression in fathers and its association with maternal depres-

sion. Journal of the American Medical Association, 303(19),

1961–1969.

Schumm, W. R., McCollum, E. E., Bugaighis, M. A., Jurich, A. P., &

Bollman, S. R. (1986). Characteristics of the Kansas family

lifesatisfaction scale in a regional sample. Psychological

Reports, 58, 975–980.

Silva, L. M. T., & Schalock, M. (2012). Autism Parenting Stress

Index: Initial psychometric evidence. Journal of Autism and

Developmental Disorders, 42(4), 566–574.

Solomon, A. (2012). Far from the tree: Parents, children and the

search for identity. New York, NY: Scribner/Simon & Schuster.

Steger, M. F., Frazier, P., Oishi, S., & Kaler, M. (2006). The meaning

in life questionnaire: Assessing the presence of and search for

meaning in life. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 53, 80–93.

Tunali, B., & Power, T. G. (2002). Coping by redefinition: Cognitive

appraisals in mothers of children with autism and children

without autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disor-

ders, 32(1), 25–34.

Wayment, H. A. (2004). It could have been me: Vicarious victims and

disaster-focused distress. Personality and Social Psychology

Bulletin, 30(4), 515–528.

Wayment, H. A. (2006). Attachment style, empathy, and helping

following a collective loss: Evidence from the September 11

terrorist attacks. Attachment & Human Development, 8(1), 1–9.

Wayment, H. A., & O’Mara, E. M. (2008). The collective and

compassionate consequences of downward social comparisons.

In H. A. Wayment & J. J. Bauer (Eds.), Transcending self-

interest: Psychological explorations of the quiet ego (pp.

159–169). Washington, DC: American Psychological

Association.

Weyand, C., O’Laughlin, L., & Bennett, P. (2013). Dimensions of

religiousness that influence parenting. Psychology of Religion

and Spirituality, 5(3), 182–191.

2018 J Autism Dev Disord (2015) 45:2008–2018

123

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.