Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology 76 (2021) 101325

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jappdp

Linking academic worries and youth academic adjustment: The role of

parental involvement
Tianying Cai *, Kelly M. Tu
Department of Human Development and Family Studies, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, United States of America

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Using a multi-informant, longitudinal design, we investigated the independent and interactive associations be­
Academic performance tween youth academic worries and parental involvement (parent-teacher relationship quality, academic so­
Academic worries cialization, schoolwork assistance) before the middle school transition as predictors of youth engagement and
Adolescence
academic performance after the middle school transition among 100 youth (53% boys; Mage = 11.05 years; 57%
Engagement
Middle school transition
White). We found that maternal academic socialization moderated the prospective association between youth
Parental involvement academic worries and academic adjustment, such that youth who experienced more academic worries coupled
with higher maternal academic socialization had higher academic performance and engagement; no association
emerged for lower maternal academic socialization. Further, maternal schoolwork assistance before middle
school directly predicted better academic performance during middle school. Findings highlight the importance
of maternal schoolwork assistance in promoting youths’ academic performance, as well as maternal academic
socialization in promoting higher academic performance and engagement for youth experiencing more academic
worries.

Introduction
The transition to middle school has long been recognized as an
exciting but challenging time in adolescents’ lives (Lord, Eccles, &
McCarthy, 1994). Compared to elementary school, middle school is
characterized by changes to the school environment, with different
teachers by subject and subjects separated by ability, as well as
increasing academic expectations and demands placed on youth
(Duchesne, Ratelle, & Roy, 2012). Perhaps not surprisingly, a majority
of youth often report being worried or concerned about the transition to
middle school (e.g., academic expectations, workload, navigating new
school environment; Duchesne, Ratelle, Poitras, & Drouin, 2009;
Duchesne et al., 2012; Odegaard & Heath, 1992). The middle school
transition itself has been negatively linked to youths’ engagement and
performance in middle school (Coelho, Marchante, & Jimerson, 2017;
Duchesne et al., 2012; Goldstein, Boxer, & Rudolph, 2015; Odegaard &
Heath, 1992; Skinner, Furrer, Marchand, & Kindermann, 2008). This
negative association may be explained in part by the stage-environment
fit theory (Eccles et al., 1993; Midgley, Feldlaufer, & Eccles, 1989) in
which youths’ developmental needs (e.g., gains in autonomy and
independence) are disrupted by or at odds with the changes in the school
environment (e.g., increasing academic expectations, teacher views of
student ability; Eccles & Roeser, 2009). Yet, the effect of youths’ aca­
demic worries about the middle school transition is less well understood
and warrant attention with some evidence that worries and anxieties,
especially about academics, are linked to poorer academic performance
(e.g., for meta-analysis, see von der Embse, Jester, Roy, & Post, 2018).
Additionally, parents could potentially ameliorate the negative effect
of youths’ worries about the middle school transition, particularly via
parental involvement, which is a reliable and consistent predictor of
academic adjustment (Barger, Kim, Kuncel, & Pomerantz, 2019; Hill &
Tyson, 2009). However, the role of parental involvement in buffering
the effects of youth academic worries on their engagement and perfor­
mance has received less attention. Thus, extending the literature, the
present study examined the independent and interactive contributions
of youth academic worries and parental involvement before middle
school on youth engagement and academic performance after the mid­
dle school transition.

* Corresponding author at: Department of Human Development and Family Studies at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 234 Bevier Hall, 905 South
Goodwin Avenue, Urbana, IL 61801, United States of America.
E-mail address: tc13@illinois.edu (T. Cai).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appdev.2021.101325
Received 10 December 2020; Received in revised form 29 August 2021; Accepted 10 September 2021
Available online 17 September 2021
0193-3973/© 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
T. Cai and K.M. Tu
Academic adjustment and worries about the middle school transition
Academic performance and engagement during the middle school
years are critical in shaping the trajectory of youths’ future achieve­
ment, such that middle school achievement is linked with youths’ high
school achievement (Balfanz, 2009; Duchesne, Larose, Guay, Vitaro, &
Tremblay, 2005). Additionally, high school academic achievement has
longer-term implications for future success, including employment op­
portunities and mental health (e.g., Lansford, Dodge, Pettit, & Bates,
2016; Te Wang & Peck, 2013). Thus, identifying contributing factors to
youth academic engagement and performance are important for sup­
porting youths’ future well-being and success.
Despite a majority of youth reporting worries or concerns about the
transition to middle school (Coelho et al., 2017; Duchesne et al., 2009,
2012; Odegaard & Heath, 1992), as well as a number of programs that
have been developed to help prepare students for the middle school
transition (for a systematic review, see van Rens, Haelermans, Groot, &
Maassen van den Brink, 2018), the effects of youths’ worries about
middle school on their engagement and academic achievement has
received relatively limited attention compared to studies investigating
the effects of the middle school transition itself (e.g., Dotterer, McHale,
& Crouter, 2009; Eccles et al., 1993; Goldstein et al., 2015; Gutman,
Sameroff, & Cole, 2003; Herbers, Reynolds, & Chen, 2013). The number
of existing middle school transition programs is particularly noteworthy
(see van Rens et al., 2018) in recognizing the potential challenges
accompanying the middle school transition.
The few existing studies examining youths’ worries about middle
school found that youth reported a range of worries, including worries
about academic performance (e.g., challenging schoolwork), changes in
the school environment (e.g., deal with multiple teachers), and re­
lationships with others (e.g., friends, peers, teachers; e.g., Duchesne
et al., 2012; Odegaard & Heath, 1992). Further, in one study, youth who
reported more worries, representing a combination of academic and
social worries (e.g., difficulty of schoolwork and peer problems,
respectively) before the middle school transition experienced poorer
school adjustment in middle school (Duchesne et al., 2012). Addition­
ally, some relevant literature on youth anxiety, including general anxi­
ety, worries, and test anxiety, revealed negative associations with
youths’ academic performance (for meta-analyses, see Seipp, 1991 and
von der Embse et al., 2018), especially in the middle school grades (von
der Embse et al., 2018). However, others have argued that anxiety or
worries could serve as a motivating factor to enhance performance (e.g.,
Eysenck & Calvo, 1992; Eysenck, Derakshan, Santos, & Calvo, 2007),
such as preparing for increasing academic demands. Collectively, there
is some evidence that youth worries can disrupt youths’ engagement and
academic performance in middle school, with effect sizes ranging from
small to moderate (Duchesne et al., 2012; Goldstein et al., 2015; Skinner
et al., 2008).
Furthermore, a few studies examining protective factors against the
negative effects of academic worries revealed some evidence that both
classroom (e.g., teacher emphasis on student engagement to develop
competencies) and family (e.g., attachment) factors were protective
against or reduced academic and school transition worries, respectively
(e.g., Duchesne et al., 2009, 2012). Of particular focus in our study is the
integral role of parents as a means to alleviate the potential negative
effects of academic worries on youths’ academic adjustment (i.e.,
engagement, academic performance) in middle school.
Parental involvement and academic adjustment during early adolescence
According to self-determination theory (Ryan & Deci, 2000), parents
(and other influential adults) play a key role in supporting youths’
developmental needs of autonomy, competence, and relatedness to help
youth achieve developmental milestones and/or overcome develop­
mental challenges. For instance, studies have found that parents’ pro­
visions of academic autonomy support and schoolwork assistance were
2
Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology 76 (2021) 101325
related to better academic adjustment, performance, and engagement
among middle and high school students (Grolnick, Raftery-Helmer,
Flamm, Marbell, & Cardemil, 2015; Ratelle, Duchesne, & Guay, 2017).
Parental involvement in academics can also be a way that parents sup­
port youths’ needs of competence and relatedness by helping youth to
develop skills to succeed academically and connect parents with their
youths’ school life, respectively.
Overall, a large body of literature has demonstrated the generally
positive links between parental involvement and children’s academic
adjustment (e.g., Wei et al., 2019; for a meta-analysis, see Barger et al.,
2019). Parental involvement in academics and schooling can be cate­
gorized into two broad forms: school-based involvement and home-
based involvement (Barger et al., 2019). School-based involvement in­
cludes parents’ direct participation in school activities (e.g., attending
parent-teacher conferences, volunteering in school events) and parental
contact and relationship with teachers (Green, Walker, Hoover-
Dempsey, & Sandler, 2007; Grolnick, Kurowski, Dunlap, & Hevey,
2000; Hughes & Kwok, 2007). Parents’ home-based involvement in­
cludes parents’ academic-related activities at home, such as academic
socialization (e.g., communicating with youth about the importance of
getting a good education) and school work assistance (e.g., helping
youth to complete homework; Wang, Hill, & Hofkens, 2014; for a meta-
analysis see Patall, Cooper, & Robinson, 2008). The current study fo­
cuses on mother-teacher relationship quality, academic socialization,
and schoolwork assistance.
The importance of parental involvement in academics for facilitating
adolescents’ academic achievement has been well-recognized, such that
both reviews and meta-analyses support a small, yet positive association
between parental involvement and academic adjustment (Barger et al.,
2019; Hill & Tyson, 2009; Hughes & Kwok, 2007). For example, high-
quality parent-teacher relationships can help parents to monitor
youths’ academic progress, provide parents with information about
when and how to intervene, and/or reflect parents’ support of youths’
academics more generally (Hassrick & Schneider, 2009; Hughes &
Kwok, 2007). Further, when parents engage in academic socialization
(e.g., discussing what youth are learning in school) and offer assistance
with schoolwork, youth have opportunities to receive messages about
the importance or value of education as well as the chance to enhance
their academic skills through practice and proper instruction, respec­
tively (Hill & Tyson, 2009). Academic socialization has also been pro­
posed to be a more effective form of involvement, especially during early
adolescence, because it allows parents to maintain involvement while
meeting adolescents’ needs of autonomy and independence (Hill &
Tyson, 2009).
Conversely, the benefit of schoolwork assistance is less clear as some
studies found schoolwork assistance to be less effective than other forms
of involvement, non-significant, or even negatively associated with in­
dicators of academic adjustment (for meta-analyses, see Barger et al.,
2019; Hill & Tyson, 2009). Specifically, a meta-analysis by Hill and
Tyson (2009) found a negative association between schoolwork assis­
tance and academic achievement among middle school students with a
small effect size (r = − 0.11). The authors explained that schoolwork
assistance can potentially interfere developmentally with youths’ au­
tonomy development and increase academic pressure (Hill & Tyson,
2009), highlighting the need to consider the manner in which parents
provide assistance (e.g., in an autonomy supportive or controlling
manner; Ratelle et al., 2017). Others have also proposed a remediation
effect such that youth who are struggling in school are more likely to
receive assistance from parents (Barger et al., 2019).
Although it is generally well-established that parental involvement
has direct implications for youths’ academic adjustment (Barger et al.,
2019; Hill & Tyson, 2009), it is less clear how parental involvement
could help to reduce the potential negative effects that youths’ academic
worries may have on their academic adjustment, especially during a
school transition with increasing academic demands and expectations,
as well as uncertainty around a new school environment. Parental
T. Cai and K.M. Tu
involvement has the potential to alleviate adolescents’ worries and
enhance academic motivation and engagement, such as helping to
reinforce or enhance youths’ value of school and/or motivation to
overcome their worries and concerns to succeed in school (Cheung &
Pomerantz, 2015; Te Wang & Sheikh-Khalil, 2014). Additionally,
parental involvement may be beneficial for adolescents who have
greater concerns about academic expectations or challenges—by getting
the support they need and also gaining the skills to manage future ac­
ademic challenges, which can enhance their sense of control over their
learning experiences (Cheung & Pomerantz, 2012; Grolnick & Slow­
iaczek, 1994).
The current study
Towards extending the literatures on worries about the middle
school transition and parental involvement, we investigated the pro­
spective association between youths’ academic worries about the up­
coming transition to middle school during their last year of elementary
school (5th grade; Time 1 or T1) and their academic adjustment in
middle school (6th grade; Time 2 or T2) using a multi-informant
approach (i.e., adolescents, mothers, and teachers). Further, we inves­
tigated whether indices of parental involvement (i.e., mother-teacher
relationship quality, academic socialization, schoolwork assistance) in
the last year of elementary school (T1) served as moderators of the as­
sociation between youth academic worries and academic adjustment.
Based on empirical findings, we expected that T1 youth academic
worries would be negatively associated with their T2 academic adjust­
ment (Duchesne et al., 2012), but that higher levels of T1 parental
involvement via higher mother-teacher relationship quality and aca­
demic socialization would attenuate this association (Barger et al., 2019;
Hughes & Kwok, 2007; Miller, Valentine, Fish, & Robinson, 2016).
However, because of the mixed findings regarding the association be­
tween schoolwork assistance and academic adjustment (Barger et al.,
2019; Hill & Tyson, 2009) we had no a priori hypothesis about the
moderating role of T1 maternal schoolwork assistance in the association
between T1 youth academic worries and T2 academic adjustment.
Methods
Participants
Data for the current study come from a longitudinal study focused on
mother-adolescent interactions about adolescent stress across the tran­
sition to middle school (Tu, Li, & Cohen, 2019; Tu & Ravindran, 2020).
At Time 1 (T1) during the spring of 5th grade, participants included 100
young adolescents (53% boys; Mage = 11.05 years, SD = 0.33), their
mothers (Mage = 41.25 years, SD = 6.22; 96.0% biological), and 78
teachers (78% reports obtained in total; 98% of mothers provided
parental permission). At Time 2 (T2) during the fall of 6th grade, par­
ticipants included 89 out of 100 youth (Mage = 11.65 years, SD = 0.32),
their mothers (Mage = 41.56 years, SD = 5.59; 95.6% biological), and 76
teachers (85% reports obtained in total; 98% of mothers provided
parental permission).
The youth in the sample included 57% White/European Americans,
14% Hispanic/Latino/a, 11% Black/African Americans, 11% multira­
cial, 6% Asian/Asian American, and 1% other. About 76% of mothers
had a bachelor’s degree or higher. Approximately 4% of families re­
ported an annual household income below $25,000; 14% reported be­
tween $25,000 and $50,000; 19% reported between $50,000 and
$75,000; and 63% reported above $75,000.
Procedures
The Institutional Review Board at University of Illinois at Urbana-
Champaign approved the study; only pertinent procedures are dis­
cussed (for additional procedures, see Cai & Tu, 2020; Tu, Cai, & Li,
3
Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology 76 (2021) 101325
2020; Tu & Ravindran, 2020). Families were recruited from the Mid­
western United States across two consecutive cohorts, spaced one year
apart (2017 and 2018). At T1 (Spring 2017 and 2018), informational
letters/emails were distributed to parents of all 5th grade students at
participating elementary schools and in local communities. Parents who
expressed interest were contacted by phone to learn about the details of
the study and scheduled for a laboratory visit. Written consent and
assent from mothers and youth, respectively, were obtained during the
visit. Exclusion criteria included limited English proficiency and youth
with a diagnosis of developmental delays or chronic illness due to lab­
oratory procedures of the larger project not examined in this study. At
T2 (Fall 2017 and 2018), families were contacted to participate again by
giving permission to contact teachers to complete surveys.
At T1, youth and their mothers participated in a laboratory session
during which they completed surveys in separate rooms. At T1 and T2,
researchers sought permission from parents to contact youths’ elemen­
tary and middle school teachers, respectively. At both waves, teachers
were contacted to complete surveys online about youths’ performance
and behavior in school.
t-tests and χ 2 tests across primary study variables and covariates
revealed that, compared to participants with T1 teacher reports of
engagement and academic performance, those without T1 teacher re­
ports had mothers who reported lower mother-teacher relationship
quality, Mno teacher report = 2.78, Mwith teacher report = 3.32, t (24.57) =
− 2.07, p = .050, and earned less than bachelor’s degree, χ 2 (1) = 6.29, p
= .012. All other comparisons between participants with and without T1
teacher reports of engagement/academic performance were not signif­
icant. Further, t-tests and χ 2 tests were conducted for participants with
and without T2 teacher reports and no significant differences emerged
across primary study variables and covariates. Participating families and
teachers were compensated at each wave for their time and effort.
Measures
Youth academic worries (T1)
To assess youth academic worries, youth were asked, “What are your
top 3 concerns or worries about going to middle school?” Similarly,
mothers were asked, “What are your child’s top 3 concerns about middle
school?” The total number of academic worries reported by youth and
mothers ranged from 1 to 4. Their responses to the open-ended question
were then coded by two independent research assistants for worries
about: academic expectations (e.g., amount of schoolwork, grades, strict
teachers, time management, not doing well in classes), school environ­
ment (e.g., navigating classes, changing bell schedule, unstructured
time), peers (e.g., peer pressure, bullying) and friendships (e.g., friends
not in the same schools). The two coders had high interrater reliability
(Kappas ranged from 0.73 to 1.00). We focused specifically on academic
expectation worries, which was calculated as a proportion score of ac­
ademic expectation worries out of all the worries named (e.g., if youth
reported 3 worries, then the number of academic expectations worries
out of 3 worries was calculated). The use of a proportion score, as
compared to the use of raw scores (frequency, sum), allows us to
contextualize youths’ academic expectation worries relative to other
worries reported and allowed us to fit more parsimonious models (single
variable vs inclusion of multiple raw score variables to control for other
worries). Separate proportion scores by informant were used. To
simplify terminology, the proportion of academic expectation worries is
referred to as academic worries.
Parent-teacher relationship quality (T1)
Mothers reported on their relationship quality with their child’s
teacher (7 items; Conduct Problems Prevention Research Group, 1991).
Items (e.g., “You feel comfortable talking with your child’s teacher
about your child”; “You think your child’s teacher is interested in getting
to know you”) were rated on a 5-point scale (0 = not at all to 4 = a great
deal). The scale demonstrated high reliability (α = 0.91).
T. Cai and K.M. Tu
Parental home involvement (T1)
Youth and mothers completed the youth and mother versions of the
parental home involvement scale, respectively (Wei et al., 2019). Items
were identical with the exception of wording modifications to reflect
youth vs parent perspectives. The parental home involvement scale has
two subscales, academic socialization (8 items; e.g., “My child and I talk
about the importance of getting a good education”; “When I am with my
child, we discuss how s/he can best manage her/his study time”; “My
child and I talk about different strategies that s/he can use to do her/his
schoolwork”) and schoolwork assistance (6 items; e.g., “I assist my child
with her/his schoolwork by helping her/him find information or ma­
terials for her/his projects”; “When my child needs help on her/his
schoolwork, I am there to help her/him myself”; “I spend time with my
child on things related to her/his schoolwork”). Although the two sub­
scales are moderately correlated, they are conceptually different (Hill &
Tyson, 2009; Wei et al., 2019). Academic socialization refers to
communication about academic expectations, learning strategies, and
messages about the value and utility of education, whereas schoolwork
assistance refers to parenting practices or behaviors where parents are
directly involved in helping children with their homework or preparing
for tests (Wei et al., 2019). Thus, we examined both subscales separately.
The items were rated on a 7-point Likert-like scale (1 = never to 7 = very
much). Both subscales demonstrated good internal consistency for youth
and mother reports (αs range from 0.81 to 0.89).
Engagement (T1-T2)
Teachers reported on youths’ engagement, which includes behav­
ioral engagement, emotional engagement, and general school engage­
ment. Behavioral engagement (5 items; e.g., “This student tries hard to
do well in school”; “In class, this student works as hard as he/she can”;
Skinner et al., 2008) was measured using a 4-point Likert-like scale (1 =
not at all true to 4 = very true). Emotional engagement (5 items; e.g.,
“When we work on something in class, this student seems interested”;
“This student enjoys learning new things in class; Skinner et al., 2008)
was measured using a 4-point Likert-like scale (1 = not at all true to 4 =
very true). General engagement (3 items; e.g., “This student does more
than required”; “In my class, this student seems tuned in”; Institute for
Research and Reform in Education, 1998) were rated on a 4-point Likert-
like scale (1 = not at all true to 4 = very true). The scores of the three
scales were highly correlated (rs ranged from 0.75 to 0.90); scores were
standardized and composited to create an overall engagement score. All
measures were reliable at T1 and T2 (αs range from 0.70 to 0.90).
Academic performance (T1-T2)
At each wave, teachers reported on youths’ academic performance
using the Mock Report Card (Pierce, Hamm, & Vandell, 1999). Teachers
rated youth in five areas (e.g., reading, math, science; 1 = failing to 5 =
excellent); items were composited for an overall academic performance
score (αs = 0.97 and 0.96 at T1 and T2, respectively).
Covariates (T1)
Covariates included youth gender (coded 0 = girls, 1 = boys), youth
age, annual family income (1 ≤ $15,000 to 5 ≥ $75,000), mother edu­
cation level (coded 0 = less than bachelor’s degree, 1 = bachelor’s degree or
higher), youth race/ethnicity (coded 0 = European American, 1 = racial/
ethnic minorities), and cohort (coded 0 = cohort 1, 1 = cohort 2).
Plan of analysis
Preliminary analyses were conducted to examine descriptive statis­
tics and bivariate correlations among study variables. Missing data
range from 1% to 24%, with the latter due to a combination of lack of
parental permission for teacher contact and participants who did not
return at T2. Missing value analysis was also conducted to determine the
pattern of missingness.
A series of step-wise regression models were conducted in AMOS
4
Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology 76 (2021) 101325
(Arbuckle, 2017), which uses full information maximum likelihood
estimation to handle missing data (Acock, 2005). First, covariates,
which included youth gender, age, and race; family income; maternal
education level; cohort; and corresponding T1 academic variables were
entered. Next, the main effects of T1 academic worries was entered,
followed by the main effect of T1 parental involvement. Lastly, the
interaction term between academic worries and parental involvement
was entered. Separate models were fitted for each index of parental
involvement. Further, to provide a rigorous test of associations and
determine replicability, one set of models tested youth-reported aca­
demic worries (predictor), mother-reported parental involvement
(moderator), and teacher-reported engagement and academic perfor­
mance (outcomes); another set of models tested mother reports of youth
academic worries (predictor), youth-reported parental involvement
(moderator), and teacher-reported engagement and academic perfor­
mance (outcomes). Significant interactions were probed using tests of
simple slopes (Aiken & West, 1991; Preacher et al., 2006), which yielded
intercepts and slopes representing the relationship between youth aca­
demic worries and academic adjustment at low (− 1 SD) and high (+1
SD) levels of parental involvement. Regions of significance of the
moderator were also probed to determine the specific values of the
moderator (i.e., parental involvement) at which the regression of aca­
demic adjustment indices on youth academic worries changed from non-
significant to significant (Preacher et al., 2006).
Further, effect sizes using Pearson correlation r (0.10 and 0.30
indicating small and medium effect size, respectively) and f2 (= Rfull2 -
Rpartial2/ 1 – Rfull2; 0.02 and 0.15 indicating small and medium effect
sizes, respectively; Cohen, 1988) for regression models are reported. We
reported f2 for significant main and interaction effects; Rfull2 refers to the
R2 of the model including the significant variable (i.e., main or moder­
ator variable, interaction term); Rpartial2 refers to the R2 of the model
without the significant variable.
Results
Preliminary analysis
Descriptive statistics and correlations between primary study vari­
ables are summarized in Table 1 and Table 2, respectively. Missing
values analysis revealed that data were missing completely at random,
χ 2 (209) = 240.94, p = .06. As seen in Table 2, T1 youth- and mother-
reported academic worries were positively correlated, as were youth
and mother reports of indices of parental involvement. Further, T1
youth-reported academic worries was negatively associated with T1
youth-reported maternal academic socialization and schoolwork assis­
tance, and the latter two were positively correlated with each other. T1
youth-reported maternal schoolwork assistance was also positively
associated with T1 teacher-reported academic performance and T2
teacher-reported engagement. T1 mother-reported academic worries
was positively correlated with T2 teacher-reported academic perfor­
mance. T1 mother reports of relationship quality with teacher, academic
socialization, and schoolwork assistance were positive associated with
each other. Teacher-reported engagement and academic performance
were positively correlated with each other across T1 and T2. Regarding
effect sizes based on correlations, results linking youth academic
worries, indices of parental involvement, and parent-teacher relation­
ship quality with youth engagement and academic performance
revealed no effects to small or medium effects in a few instances.
Among covariates, compared with girls, boys had lower engagement
and academic performance at T1. Higher family income was associated
with higher T1 mother-reported youth academic worries, and higher T2
teacher-reported engagement and academic performance. Higher
maternal education was associated with higher T1 mother-reported
youth academic worries, greater T1 mother-reported schoolwork assis­
tance, and higher T2 teacher-reported academic performance. Cohort 2
mothers reported higher T1 mother-teacher relationship quality, T1
T. Cai and K.M. Tu Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology 76 (2021) 101325

Table 1 academic socialization, and T1 schoolwork assistance. Youth in Cohort 2

Descriptive statistics of academic worries, parental involvement and academic had lower teacher-reported academic performance at T2. No significant
performance. correlations emerged for youths’ racial/ethnic minority status or age.
Variables Mean or % for SD N Min Max
code of 1 Academic worries and parental involvement predicting engagement
1. T1 YR Youth academic 0.39 0.28 87 0.00 1.00
worries As shown in Table 3, among covariates for youth- and mother-
2. T1 YR Academic 3.49 0.88 100 1.13 5.00 reported academic worries models, youth from higher income families
socialization
and Cohort 1 had higher engagement at T2. Further, engagement was
3. T1 YR Schoolwork 3.61 0.83 99 1.33 5.00
assistance relatively stable from T1 to T2.
4. T1 MR Youth academic 0.30 0.29 95 0.00 1.00
worries Youth-reported academic worries x mother-reported parental involvement
5. T1 MR Academic 5.17 1.11 99 1.88 7.00
As shown in Table 3, no main effect emerged for youth-reported
socialization
6. T1 MR Schoolwork 5.07 1.19 99 1.17 7.00 academic worries or indices of parental involvement. However,
assistance maternal academic socialization emerged as a moderator of the associ­
7. T1 MR Mother-teacher 3.20 0.85 99 0.71 4.00 ation between T1 youth-reported academic worries and T2 teacher-
relationship reported engagement. The interaction term explained 4% of the
8. T1 TR Engagement 0.00 0.95 78 − 3.00 0.81
unique variance (small effect size, f2 = 0.10). A follow-up simple slopes
9. T1 TR Academic 4.19 0.88 78 2.00 5.00
performance analysis revealed that T1 academic worries were positively associated
10. T2 TR Engagement 0.00 0.93 76 − 3.34 0.90 with T2 teacher-reported engagement at higher levels of maternal aca­
11. T2 TR Academic 4.03 0.84 75 1.60 5.00 demic socialization, B (SE) = 0.64 (0.33), p = .052, but not at lower
performance
levels of maternal academic socialization, B (SE) = − 0.39 (0.33), p =
12. Youth gender (1 = boys) 53%
13. T1 Youth age 11.04 0.33 100 10.08 12.17
.234 (see Fig. 1). Regions of significance test revealed that the lower and
14. T1 Family income 4.39 0.92 97 1.00 5.00 upper bounds of the regions of significance tests were − 2.65 and 1.14
15. T1 Maternal education (1 75% SDs, respectively, from the mean of maternal academic socialization.
≥ Bachelor’s) Thus, the positive association between youth academic worries and
16. Youth minority status (1 43%
academic performance became significant when maternal academic
= minority)
17. Cohort (1 = cohort 2) 48% socialization was above 1.14 SD of the mean (14.1% of youth in the
sample). Maternal schoolwork assistance and the mother-teacher rela­
Note. T1 = Time 1. T2 = Time 2. YR = Youth report. MR = Mother report. TR =
tionship did not moderate the association between T1 youth academic
Teacher report.
worries and T2 engagement.

Mother-reported academic worries x youth-reported parental involvement

As shown in Table 3, no main effects emerged from mother-reported

Table 2
Correlations between academic worries, parental involvement and academic performance.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

1. T1 YR Youth academic worries –

2. T1 YR Maternal academic socialization − 0.25* –
3. T1 YR Maternal schoolwork assistance − 0.26* 0.63*** –
4. T1 MR Youth academic worries 0.41*** − 0.33*** − 0.22* –
5. T1 MR Maternal academic socialization − 0.15 0.40*** 0.35*** − 0.09 –
6. T1 MR Maternal schoolwork assistance − 0.13 0.28** 0.35*** − 0.13 0.63*** –
7. T1 MR Mother-teacher relationship 0.02 0.11 0.13 − 0.04 0.20* 0.28**
8. T1 TR Engagement − 0.02 0.01 0.19 0.10 − 0.07 0.08 0.09
9. T1 TR Academic performance − 0.12 0.00 0.25* 0.05 − 0.12 − 0.10 0.10 0.72***
10. T2 TR Engagement − 0.06 0.06 0.27* 0.04 0.01 0.18 0.17 0.68*** 0.54***
11. T2 TR Academic performance 0.08 − 0.06 0.08 0.23* − 0.10 0.05 0.04 0.57*** 0.57***
12. Youth gender (1 = boys) 0.12 0.01 − 0.19 0.13 − 0.18 − 0.12 0.09 − 0.26* − 0.27*
13. T1 Youth age − 0.03 0.08 0.05 0.12 0.05 0.02 − 0.06 0.16 0.14
14. T1 Family income 0.09 − 0.05 0.11 0.25* 0.00 0.14 0.10 0.22 0.21
15. T1 Maternal education (1 ≥ Bachelor’s) 0.09 0.07 0.09 0.23* 0.09 0.21* 0.18 0.13 0.00
16. Youth minority status (1 = minority) − 0.10 0.12 0.02 0.01 0.12 − 0.07 0.02 − 0.05 − 0.10
17. Cohort (1 = cohort 2) 0.07 0.15 0.06 0.00 0.29** 0.27** 0.25* 0.09 0.00

10 11 12 13 14 15 16

10. T2 TR Engagement –
11. T2 TR Academic performance 0.69*** –
12. Youth gender (1 = boys) − 0.04 0.07 –
13. T1 Youth age 0.15 0.12 − 0.17 –
14. T1 Family income 0.39*** 0.44*** 0.06 0.07 –
15. T1 Maternal education (1 ≥ Bachelor’s) 0.20 0.25* 0.06 0.04 0.40*** –
16. Youth minority status (1 = minority) − 0.08 − 0.15 0.01 − 0.06 − 0.24* − 0.01 –
17. Cohort (1 = cohort 2) − 0.10 − 0.27* − 0.06 0.11 0.03 0.05 0.10

Note. T1 = Time 1. T2 = Time 2. YR = Youth report. MR = Mother report. TR = Teacher report.

*
p < .05.
**
p < .01.
***
p < .001.

5
T. Cai and K.M. Tu Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology 76 (2021) 101325

Table 3
Regression coefficients linking academic worries and parental involvement with adolescent engagement and academic performance.
Models YR academic worries x MR involvement MR academic worries x YR involvement

T2 engagement T2 academic performance T2 engagement T2 academic performance

B (SE) β B (SE) β B (SE) β B (SE) β

Covariates
Gender (1 = boys) 0.15 (0.14) 0.08 0.31*(0.14) 0.19 0.15 (0.14) 0.08 0.31*(0.14) 0.19
T1 Youth age 0.11 (0.21) 0.04 0.15 (0.20) 0.06 0.11 (0.21) 0.04 0.15 (0.20) 0.06
T1 Family income 0.31 (0.07)*** 0.31 0.25 (0.07)** 0.27 0.31 (0.07)*** 0.31 0.25 (0.07)** 0.27
T1 Maternal education (1 ≥ Bachelor’s) − 0.17 (0.16) − 0.08 0.15 (0.16) 0.08 − 0.17 (0.16) − 0.08 0.15 (0.16) 0.08
Minority status (1 = minority) 0.11 (0.14) 0.06 − 0.09 (0.14) − 0.05 0.11 (0.14) 0.06 − 0.09 (0.14) − 0.05
Cohort (1 = cohort 2) − 0.30 (0.14)* − 0.16 − 0.45 (0.14)*** − 0.27 − 0.30 (0.14)* − 0.16 − 0.45 (0.14)*** − 0.27
T1 Engagement/Academic performance 0.69 (0.07)*** 0.71 0.56 (0.08)*** 0.59 0.69 (0.07)*** 0.71 0.56 (0.08)*** 0.59
R2 0.65 0.55 0.65 0.55

Main predictor
T1 Youth academic worries 0.12 (0.26) 0.04 0.40 (0.25) 0.14 − 0.29 (0.24) − 0.09 0.28 (0.24) 0.10
R2/ ΔR2 0.65/0.00 0.58/0.03 0.66/0.01 0.55/0.00

Academic socialization model

T1 Maternal academic socialization − 0.00 (0.06) − 0.00 0.04 (0.06) 0.05 0.00 (0.08) 0.00 0.04 (0.08) 0.04
R2/ ΔR2 0.65/0.00 0.59/0.01 0.66/0.00 0.55/0.00
Academic worries x socialization 0.46 (0.19)* 0.18 0.47 (0.18)** 0.20 0.21 (0.30) 0.05 0.72 (0.29)* 0.20
R2/ ΔR2 0.69/0.04 0.65/0.06 0.66/0.00 0.60/0.05

Schoolwork assistance model

T1 Maternal schoolwork assistance 0.03 (0.06) 0.04 0.13(0.05)* 0.17 0.14 (0.08) 0.12 0.12 (0.08) 0.12
R2/ ΔR2 0.65/0.00 0.63/0.05 0.64/− 0.02 0.57/0.02
Academic worries x assistance 0.30 (0.18) 0.13 0.18 (0.17) 0.09 0.12 (0.29) 0.03 0.23 (0.28) 0.07
R2/ ΔR2 0.63/− 0.02 0.64/0.01 0.65/0.01 0.57/0.00

Mother-teacher relationship model

T1 Mother-teacher relationship 0.12 (0.08) 0.11 0.07 (0.08) 0.07 N/A
R2/ ΔR2 0.65/0.00 0.58/0.00
Academic worries x mother-teacher relationship 0.45 (0.30) 0.11 0.46 (0.29) 0.13
R2/ ΔR2 0.65/0.00 0.61/0.03

Note. Coefficients reported are from step of entry. In final model with all variables, the coefficients for the main effect of youth academic worries were nearly identical
to those reported in the table at step of entry.
*
p < .05.
**
p < .01.
***
p < .001.

Fig. 1. The association between T1 youth-reported

academic worries and T2 teacher-reported engage­
ment at lower (− 1 SD) and higher (+1 SD) levels of
maternal academic socialization.
Note. T1 = Time 1. T2 = Time 2. YR = Youth report.
MR = Mother report. TR = Teacher report.
*p = .05.

academic worries or any of the parental involvement indices. Further, no
index of parental involvement moderated the association between T1
mother-reported worries and T2 teacher-reported engagement.
Academic worries and parental involvement predicting academic
performance
As shown in Table 3, among covariates for youth- and mother-
reported academic worries models, boys and youth from higher

6
T. Cai and K.M. Tu
income families and Cohort 1 had higher academic performance at T2.
Further, academic performance was relatively stable from T1 to T2.
Youth-reported academic worries x mother-reported parental involvement
As shown in Table 3, no main effect emerged for youth-reported
academic worries. Of the indices of parental involvement, T1 maternal
schoolwork assistance predicted better T2 teacher-reported academic
performance, which explained 5% of the unique variance (medium ef­
fect size, f2 = 0.15). No other main effects emerged.
Further, the interaction between T1 youth-reported academic
worries and T1 maternal academic socialization predicted T2 academic
performance. The interaction term explained 6% of the unique variance
(medium effect size, f2 = 0.16). A follow-up simple slopes analysis
revealed that T1 academic worries were positively associated with T2
teacher-reported academic performance at higher levels of maternal
academic socialization, B (SE) = 0.97 (0.31), p = .002, but not at lower
levels of maternal academic socialization, B (SE) = − 0.08 (0.31), p =
.807 (see Fig. 2). Further, the lower and upper bounds of the regions of
significance tests were − 4.63 and 0.06 SDs, respectively, from the mean
of maternal academic socialization. Thus, the positive association be­
tween youth academic worries and academic performance became sig­
nificant when maternal academic socialization was above 0.06 SD of the
mean (56% of youth in the sample).
Mother-reported youth academic worries x youth-reported parental
involvement
As shown in Table 3, no main effect emerged for mother-reported
academic worries and youth-reported parental involvement. However,
similar to the youth-reported academic worries model, the interaction
between mother-reported academic worries and youth-reported
maternal academic socialization predicted T2 academic performance,
which explained 5% of the unique variance in academic performance
(small effect size, f2 = 0.11). Follow-up simple slopes analysis revealed
that T1 academic worries were positively associated with T2 teacher-
reported academic performance at higher levels of maternal academic
socialization, B (SE) = 1.02 (0.34), p = .003, but not at lower levels of
mother academic socialization, B (SE) = − 0.24 (0.34), p = .482 (see
Fig. 3). Further, the lower and upper bounds of the regions of signifi­
cance tests were − 3.02 and 0.09 SDs, respectively, from the mean of
Fig. 2. The association between T1 youth-reported academic worries and T2 teacher-reported academic performance at lower (− 1 SD) and higher (+1 SD) levels of
maternal academic socialization.
Note. T1 = Time 1. T2 = Time 2. YR = Youth report. MR = Mother report. TR = Teacher report. **p < .01.
7
Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology 76 (2021) 101325
youth-reported maternal academic socialization. Thus, the positive as­
sociation between mother reports of youth academic worries and aca­
demic performance became significant when youth-reported maternal
academic socialization was above 0.09 SD of the mean (49% of youth in
the sample).
Discussion
Utilizing a multi-informant, longitudinal design, findings from the
present study revealed that, although no main effects emerged for youth
academic worries, maternal academic socialization served as a moder­
ator of the association between youth academic worries before middle
school and youths’ academic performance after the transition to middle
school. Specifically, youth academic worries was positively associated
with academic performance when mothers engaged in more academic
socialization, but not less academic socialization, and this pattern of
findings was replicated across two multi-informant models. Similarly, a
positive association emerged between youth-reported academic worries
and teacher-reported engagement when mothers reported more aca­
demic socialization, although this was not replicated in the mother-
reported academic worries model. Further, a main effect emerged for
maternal schoolwork assistance (but not mother-teacher relationship
quality or maternal academic socialization), such that mother-reported
schoolwork assistance before the middle school transition predicted
better teacher-reported academic performance after middle school
transition. Thus, in our study, different patterns of findings emerged for
the three types of parental involvement examined (i.e., academic so­
cialization as moderator, schoolwork assistance main effect, and no ef­
fect for mother-teacher relationship quality).
Surprisingly, main effects of youth- and mother-reported academic
worries on youth academic adjustment in middle school did not emerge,
which is inconsistent with some prior studies (e.g., Duchesne et al.,
2012; Goldstein et al., 2015). One potential explanation may be differ­
ences in assessments of worries. Whereas Duchesne et al. (2012)
examined youth reports about the extent to which they experienced
worries in response to a range of academic and social issues (e.g., aca­
demic demands; relationships with teachers, peers) in the prediction of
general school adjustment, we examined youth reports of their top
worries about the middle school transition and categorized each worry
T. Cai and K.M. Tu
Fig. 3. The association between T1 mother-reported youth academic worries and T2 teacher-reported academic performance at lower (− 1 SD) and higher (+1 SD)
levels of youth-reported maternal academic socialization.
Note. T1 = Time 1. T2 = Time 2. YR = Youth report. MR = Mother report. TR = Teacher report. **p < .01.
in order to calculate a proportion of academic worries out of all worries
reported.
However, despite non-significant main effects of youth academic
worries, maternal academic socialization (but not mother-teacher rela­
tionship quality or schoolwork assistance) moderated the association
between academic worries and academic performance among youth,
partially supporting our hypothesis. Specifically, a positive association
emerged between proportion of academic worries and youths’ academic
performance in middle school, but only when mothers engaged in more
academic socialization (e.g., communication or discussions about
schoolwork and the importance of education). We speculate that
maternal academic socialization could help to reinforce or enhance
youths’ value of school and/or potentially use their worries to serve as
motivation to succeed academically, resulting in better academic per­
formance, despite academic worries and concerns (Cheung & Pomer­
antz, 2015; Hill & Tyson, 2009).
In contrast, when the proportion of youth academic worries was
lower, higher levels of maternal academic socialization (as compared to
lower levels) appeared to have counter-productive effects. When youth
are less concerned about academics (and more worried about other
areas, such as peer relationships), but are met with more maternal ac­
ademic socialization, the mismatch between youths’ needs and
parenting behaviors may result in poorer academic performance.
Indeed, other concerns could also interfere with academic performance
(e.g., peer concerns; Juvonen, Wang, & Espinoza, 2011), and youth may
need parental support in those areas as well. Collectively, the patterns of
associations appear to be consistent with the protective-enhancing
model of resilience (Luthar, Cicchetti, & Becker, 2000), such that a
protective moderator (i.e., maternal socialization) attenuated or pro­
moted competence (i.e., academic performance) at higher levels of risk
(i.e., more academic worries), but not at lower levels of risk (i.e., less
academic worries). Notably, the pattern of associations was replicated
across youth-reported academic worries x mother-reported academic so­
cialization and mother-reported academic worries x youth-reported aca­
demic socialization models, highlighting the robustness of this finding.
Although maternal schoolwork assistance did not moderate the
prospective association between academic worries and youth academic
adjustment, more mother-reported schoolwork assistance before middle
school was directly related to better academic performance after the
8
Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology 76 (2021) 101325
middle school transition. This finding is somewhat inconsistent with
findings from a meta-analysis (Hill & Tyson, 2009), which found that
schoolwork assistance had negative associations with academic perfor­
mance (although a small effect size). The studies included in the meta-
analysis examined associations between schoolwork assistance and
youth academic adjustment in middle school (Hill & Tyson, 2009). In
contrast, the current study examined associations across the transition
from elementary to middle school. Some reasons that parental
involvement in the form of schoolwork assistance prior to middle school
may be beneficial for later academic achievement is that it may help to
equip youth with problem-solving skills that could be applied to future
academic challenges through parents’ direct instruction and/or
modeling (e.g., Tu et al., 2020), as well as help youth develop a routine
of doing their schoolwork. Mothers’ provision of schoolwork assistance
could also help to promote youths’ sense of competence (e.g., Doctoroff
& Arnold, 2017; Grolnick et al., 2015; Ratelle et al., 2017). Additionally,
maternal schoolwork assistance likely conveys messages about the
importance and value of education to youth (Pomerantz, Qin, Wang, &
Chen, 2011) and could contribute to youths’ sense of connection and
relatedness to mothers (Doctoroff & Arnold, 2017), both of which have
benefits for youths’ academic adjustment (Pomerantz et al., 2011).
Neither main nor interaction effects emerged for mother-teacher
relationship quality, suggesting that parental school involvement in
elementary school may not have an effect on youths’ academic perfor­
mance in middle school. This is somewhat consistent with prior studies
that found smaller effects of school-based, as compared to home-based,
involvement (Barger et al., 2019). Further, the relationship that mothers
develop with elementary school teachers may differ from those of
middle school teachers because of the number of teachers youth have in
middle school compared to elementary school. It is also possible that
mothers’ relationship with middle school teachers as compared with
elementary school teachers have more bearing on youths’ academic
adjustment in middle school. Additionally, as youth get older, teachers
tend to communicate more directly with youth and less with parents
(Adams & Christenson, 2000), potentially explaining the non-significant
findings for mother-teacher relationship quality in the present study.
Lastly, more limited support emerged in the prediction of youth
engagement in middle school. Only one finding emerged, such that
youth-reported academic worries predicted more engagement in middle
T. Cai and K.M. Tu
school when mothers utilized more academic socialization. When youth
report more academic worries, maternal academic socialization could
help to motivate youths’ efforts in school, resulting in higher levels of
engagement at school (Eysenck et al., 2007). Conversely, main and
interaction effects of youth academic worries and other indices of
parental involvement did not significantly predict youths’ engagement
in middle school. Perhaps youth worries and parental involvement have
less of an impact on the extent to which youth are engaging at school.
Other factors, such as the classroom environment (e.g., sense of safety,
being bored), teacher classroom management and responsiveness to­
wards students, and/or classmates’ behaviors and engagement may
have a greater influence on youth engagement at school (Skinner et al.,
2008). Further, in thinking about the context of the present study, school
transitions are disruptive and have been linked with general declines in
engagement (Eccles et al., 1993; Skinner et al., 2008).
The current study is not without limitations. First, the study is con­
ducted with a community sample of adolescents, with relatively higher
levels of parental involvement and student academic performance and
engagement. Although we had a range of racial/ethnic minority youth
(comprising 43% of the sample), a majority of the sample was White/
European American and additional approaches are needed to unpack
between and within group differences among underrepresented racial/
ethnic groups. Further, a majority of youth were from families with high
maternal education. Future studies with more diversity in family so­
cioeconomic status and race/ethnicity would provide more insight
about the extent to which parents’ home- and school-based involvement
can alleviate academic worries, especially among at-risk groups or for
underrepresented youth (Barger et al., 2019) given some evidence that
early adolescents from lower socioeconomic status and minority or un­
derrepresented backgrounds are more likely to become disengaged from
school (Li & Lerner, 2011). Second, we measured the proportion of
youths’ academic worries, out of their top three worries about middle
school, but not the severity of academic worries and/or their self-
evaluation of ability in relation to academic worries. The severity of
academic worries may have different implications for academic adjust­
ment as high levels of stress or anxiety could impede youths’ engage­
ment in schoolwork (Goldstein et al., 2015; Skinner et al., 2008).
Additionally, future studies might consider accounting for the value
youth place on engagement and academic performance and examine
how it corresponds with their self-evaluations of their abilities in
informing youths’ worries to provide more information to better un­
derstand some of the inconsistent findings and propositions in the
literature (e.g., Lauermann, Eccles, & Pekrun, 2017; Pekrun, 2006).
Third, although we measured youths’ academic worries prior to the
middle school transition and their engagement and academic perfor­
mance after the middle school transition, the study had a relatively short
time span (two waves spaced 7 months apart). Future studies with
additional waves of assessments can provide more information about the
longer-term effects of academic worries.
Despite these limitations, the current study highlights the impor­
tance of maternal schoolwork assistance in promoting youths’ academic
performance in middle school, as well as maternal academic socializ­
ation in promoting higher academic performance and more engagement
in the face of academic worries. The findings from the current study are
informative for parents in recognizing how their involvement at home
can help to promote youths’ academic performance during a potentially
disruptive time in early adolescence with the transition to middle
school. In providing schoolwork assistance, parents can equip their
youth with important skills that can go beyond a specific assignment.
Youth may gain a broader repertoire of strategies for how to address or
handle academic challenges or problems from direct instruction from
parents and observing how parents are helping them with their work.
Further, academic socialization or discussions about youths’ schoolwork
or study strategies more generally and communication about the value
and importance of education also appears to have benefits for youth who
may be more worried or anxious about their academics in relation to the
9
Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology 76 (2021) 101325
upcoming school changes. Schoolwork assistance and academic social­
ization also provide opportunities for parents to connect with youth to
help them develop competence and relatedness, which can also support
their autonomy as they transition to middle school. Yet, our findings also
suggest that parents need to recognize that youth may have different
types of worries that also warrant attention and parental support. Thus,
parents should adjust their approaches and behaviors to meet youths’
developmental needs during the transition to middle school.
Author note
This research was supported by the USDA National Institute of Food
and Agriculture, Hatch Project (ILLU-793-344) awarded to Kelly M. Tu.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors have no conflict of interest to report.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank the families and teachers for their
participation in this study. We would also like to thank the school ad­
ministrators for their assistance in recruitment. Lastly, we would like to
acknowledge the project staff, especially Saira Gonzales, Kelsie Olsen,
and Brett Cohen, for their involvement with data coding.
References
Acock, A. C. (2005). Working with missing values. Journal of Marriage and Family, 67(4),
1012–1028. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2005.00191.x
Adams, K. S., & Christenson, S. L. (2000). Trust and the family-school relationship
examination of parent-teacher differences in elementary and secondary grades.
Journal of School Psychology, 38(5), 477–497. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-4405
(00)00048-0
Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions.
Sage.
Arbuckle, J. L. (2017). IBM SPSS Amos 25 User’s guide (IBM SPSS).
Balfanz, R. (2009). Putting middle grades students on the graduation path: A policy and
practice brief. June (pp. 1–16). National Middle School Association https://www.
amle.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/Policy_Brief_Balfanz.pdf.
Barger, M. M., Kim, E. M., Kuncel, N. R., & Pomerantz, E. M. (2019). The relation
between parents’ involvement in children’s schooling and children’s adjustment: A
meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 145(9), 855–890. https://doi.org/10.1037/
bul0000201
Cai, T., & Tu, K. M. (2020). Linking parental monitoring and psychological control with
internalizing symptoms in early adolescence: The moderating role of vagal tone.
Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 48(6), 809–821. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s10802-020-00631-w
Cheung, C. S. S., & Pomerantz, E. M. (2012). Why does parents’ involvement enhance
children’s achievement? The role of parent-oriented motivation. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 104(3), 820–832. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0027183
Cheung, C. S. S., & Pomerantz, E. M. (2015). Value development underlies the benefits of
parents’ involvement in children’s learning: A longitudinal investigation in the
United States and China. Journal of Educational Psychology, 107(1), 309–320. https://
doi.org/10.1037/a0037458
Coelho, V. A., Marchante, M., & Jimerson, S. R. (2017). Promoting a positive middle
school Ttansition: A randomized-controlled treatment study examining self-concept
and self-esteem. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 46(3), 558–569. https://doi.org/
10.1007/s10964-016-0510-6
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale,
NJ: Erlbaum.
Doctoroff, G. L., & Arnold, D. H. (2017). Doing homework together: The relation between
parenting strategies, child engagement, and achievement. Journal of Applied
Developmental Psychology, 48, 103–113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
appdev.2017.01.001
Dotterer, A. M., McHale, S. M., & Crouter, A. C. (2009). The development and correlates
of academic interests from childhood through adolescence. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 101(2), 509–519. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013987
Duchesne, S., Larose, S., Guay, F., Vitaro, F., & Tremblay, R. E. (2005). The transition
from elementary to high school: The pivotal role of mother and child characteristics
in explaining trajectories of academic functioning. International Journal of Behavioral
Development, 29(5), 409–417. https://doi.org/10.1080/01650250500206067
Duchesne, S., Ratelle, C. F., Poitras, S.-C., & Drouin, E. (2009). Early adolescent
attachment to parents, emotional problems, and teacher-academic worries about the
middle school transition. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 29(5), 743–766. https://
doi.org/10.1177/0272431608325502
T. Cai and K.M. Tu
Duchesne, S., Ratelle, C. F., & Roy, A. (2012). Worries about middle school transition and
subsequent adjustment: The moderating role of classroom goal structure. Journal of
Early Adolescence, 32(5), 681–710. https://doi.org/10.1177/0272431611419506
Eccles, J. S., & Roeser, R. W. (2009). Schools, academic motivation, and stage-
environment fit. In R. M. Lerner, & L. Steinberg (Eds.), Handbook of adolescent
psychology: Individual bases of adolescent development (pp. 404–434). John Wiley &
Sons Inc.
Eccles, J. S., Midgley, M., Wigfield, A., Buchanan, C. M., Reuman, D., Flanagan, C., &
Mac Iver, D. (1993). Development during adolescence: The impact of stage-
environment fit on young adolescents’ experiences in schools and in families.
American Psychologist, 48(2), 90–101. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.48.2.90
von der Embse, N., Jester, D., Roy, D., & Post, J. (2018). Test anxiety effects, predictors,
and correlates: A 30-year meta-analytic review. Journal of Affective Disorders, 227
(November 2017), 483–493. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2017.11.048
Eysenck, M. W., & Calvo, M. G. (1992). Anxiety and performance: The processing
efficiency theory. Cognition and Emotion, 6(6), 409–434. https://doi.org/10.1080/
02699939208409696
Eysenck, M. W., Derakshan, N., Santos, R., & Calvo, M. G. (2007). Anxiety and cognitive
performance: Attentional control theory. Emotion, 7(2), 336–353. https://doi.org/
10.1037/1528-3542.7.2.336
Goldstein, S. E., Boxer, P., & Rudolph, E. (2015). Middle school transition stress: Links
with academic performance, motivation, and school experiences. Contemporary
School Psychology, 19(1), 21–29. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40688-014-0044-4
Green, C. L., Walker, J. M. T., Hoover-Dempsey, K. V., & Sandler, H. M. (2007). Parents’
motivations for involvement in children’s education: An empirical test of a
theoretical model of parental involvement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99(3),
532–544. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.99.3.532
Grolnick, W. S., Kurowski, C. O., Dunlap, K. G., & Hevey, C. (2000). Parental resources
and the transition to junior high. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 10(4), 465–488.
https://doi.org/10.1207/SJRA1004_05
Grolnick, W. S., Raftery-Helmer, J. N., Flamm, E. S., Marbell, K. N., & Cardemil, E. V.
(2015). Parental provision of academic structure and the transition to middle school.
Journal of Research on Adolescence, 25(4), 668–684. https://doi.org/10.1111/
jora.12161
Grolnick, W. S., & Slowiaczek, M. L. (1994). Parents’ involvement in children’s
schooling: A multidimensional conceptualization and motivational model. Child
Development, 65(1), 237–252.
Gutman, L. M., Sameroff, A. J., & Cole, R. (2003). Academic growth curve trajectories
from 1st grade to 12th grade: Effects of multiple social risk factors and preschool
child factors. Developmental Psychology, 39(4), 777–790. https://doi.org/10.1037/
0012-1649.39.4.777
Hassrick, E. M., & Schneider, B. (2009). Parent surveillance in schools: A question of
social class. American Journal of Education, 115(4), 671. https://doi.org/10.1086/
599787
Herbers, J. E., Reynolds, A. J., & Chen, C. C. (2013). School mobility and developmental
outcomes in young adulthood. Development and Psychopathology, 25(2), 501–515.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954579412001204
Hill, N. E., & Tyson, D. F. (2009). Parental involvement in middle school: A meta-analytic
assessment of the strategies that promote achievement. Developmental Psychology, 45
(3), 740–763. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015362
Hughes, J., & Kwok, O. M. (2007). Influence of student-teacher and parent-teacher
relationships on lower achieving readers’ engagement and achievement in the
primary grades. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99(1), 39–51. https://doi.org/
10.1037/0022-0663.99.1.39
Juvonen, J., Wang, Y., & Espinoza, G. (2011). Bullying experiences and compromised
academic performance across middle school grades. Journal of Early Adolescence, 31
(1), 152–173. https://doi.org/10.1177/0272431610379415
Lansford, J. E., Dodge, K. A., Pettit, G. S., & Bates, J. E. (2016). A public health
perspective on school dropout and adult outcomes: A prospective study of risk and
protective factors from age 5 to 27 years. Journal of Adolescent Health, 58(6),
652–658. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2016.01.014
Lauermann, F., Eccles, J. S., & Pekrun, R. (2017). Why do children worry about their
academic achievement? An expectancy-value perspective on elementary students’
worries about their mathematics and reading performance. ZDM - Mathematics
Education, 49(3), 339–354. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-017-0832-1
Li, Y., & Lerner, R. M. (2011). Trajectories of school engagement during dolescence:
Implications for grades, depression, delinquency, and substance use. Developmental
Psychology, 47(1), 233–247. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0021307
Lord, S. E., Eccles, J. S., & McCarthy, K. A. (1994). Surviving the junior high school
transition family processes and self-perceptions as protective and risk factors. The
10
Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology 76 (2021) 101325
Journal of Early Adolescence, 14(2), 162–199. https://doi.org/10.1177/
027243169401400205
Luthar, S. S., Cicchetti, D., & Becker, B. (2000). The construct of resilience: A critical
evaluation and guidelines for future work. Child Development, 71(3), 543–562.
https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8624.00164
Midgley, C., Feldlaufer, H., & Eccles, J. S. (1989). Student/teacher relations and attitudes
toward nathematics before and after the transition to junior high school. Child
Development, 60(4), 981. https://doi.org/10.2307/1131038
Miller, H., Valentine, J. L., Fish, R., & Robinson, M. (2016). Is the feeling mutual?
Examining parent-teacher relationships in low-income, predominantly Latino
schools. American Journal of Education, 123(1), 37–67. https://doi.org/10.1086/
688167
Odegaard, S. L., & Heath, J. A. (1992). Assisting the elementary school student in the
transition to a middle level school. Middle School Journal, 24(2), 21–25. https://doi.
org/10.1080/00940771.1992.11495163
Patall, E. A., Cooper, H., & Robinson, J. C. (2008). Parent involvement in homework: A
research synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 78(4), 1039–1101. https://doi.
org/10.3102/0034654308325185
Pekrun, R. (2006). The control-value theory of achievement emotions: Assumptions,
corollaries, and implications for educational research and practice. Educational
Psychology Review, 18(4), 315–341. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-006-9029-9
Pierce, K. M., Hamm, J. V., & Vandell, D. L. (1999). Experiences in after-school programs
and children’s adjustment in first-grade classrooms. Child Development, 70(3),
756–767. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8624.00054
Pomerantz, E. M., Qin, L., Wang, Q., & Chen, H. (2011). Changes in early adolescents’
sense of responsibility to their parents in the United States and China: Implications
for academic functioning. Child Development, 82(4), 1136–1151. https://doi.org/
10.1111/j.1467-8624.2011.01588.x
Preacher, K. J., Curran, P. J., & Bauer, D. J. (2006). Computational Tools for Probing
Interactions in Multiple Linear Regression, Multilevel Modeling, and Latent Curve
Analysis. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 31(4), 437–448. https://doi.
org/10.3102/10769986031004437
Ratelle, C. F., Duchesne, S., & Guay, F. (2017). Predicting school adjustment from
multiple perspectives on parental behaviors. Journal of Adolescence, 54, 60–72.
van Rens, M., Haelermans, C., Groot, W., & Maassen van den Brink, H. (2018).
Facilitating a successful transition to secondary school: (How) does it work? A
systematic literature review. Adolescent Research Review, 3(1), 43–56. https://doi.
org/10.1007/s40894-017-0063-2
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic definitions
and new directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 54–67. https://doi.
org/10.1006/ceps.1999.1020
Seipp, B. (1991). Anxiety and academic performance: A meta-analysis of findings.
Anxiety Research, 4(1), 27–41. https://doi.org/10.1080/08917779108248762
Skinner, E., Furrer, C., Marchand, G., & Kindermann, T. (2008). Engagement and
disaffection in the classroom: Part of a larger motivational dynamic? Journal of
Educational Psychology, 100(4), 765–781. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0012840
Wang, M. T., Hill, N. E., & Hofkens, T. (2014). Parental involvement and African
American and European American adolescents’ academic, behavioral, and emotional
development in secondary school. Child Development, 85(6), 2151–2168. https://doi.
org/10.1111/cdev.12284
Te Wang, M., & Peck, S. C. (2013). Adolescent educational success and mental health
vary across school engagement profiles. Developmental Psychology, 49(7),
1266–1276. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0030028
Te Wang, M., & Sheikh-Khalil, S. (2014). Does parental involvement matter for student
achievement and mental health in high school? Child Development, 85(2), 610–625.
https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12153
Tu, K. M., Cai, T., & Li, X. (2020). Adolescent coping with academic challenges: The role
of parental socialization of coping. Journal of Adolescence, 81(March), 27–38.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2020.03.008
Tu, K. M., Li, X., & Cohen, J. R. (2019). The “Heart” of depression during early
adolescence. Developmental Psychobiology, 61(8), 1168–1179. https://doi.org/
10.1002/dev.21862
Tu, K. M., & Ravindran, N. (2020). Getting under the skin: Maternal social coaching and
adolescent peer adjustment. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 66, 101091.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appdev.2019.101091
Wei, J., Pomerantz, E. M., Ng, F. F. Y., Yu, Y., Wang, M., & Wang, Q. (2019). Why does
parents’ involvement in youth’s learning vary across elementary, middle, and high
school? Contemporary Educational Psychology, 56, 262–274. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.cedpsych.2018.12.007