Ethnic and Gender Differences in Family Social Support among Black Adolescents

Abstract

This study examines black adolescents’ reports of the most helpful types of social support that they receive from and provide to family members, and whether family support exchanges vary by ethnicity (African American vs. Black Caribbean) and gender. Data for this study are from the National Survey of American Life Adolescent Supplement (NSAL-A), a national, probability sample of African American and Black Caribbean youth (ages 13–17). Overall, youth reported financial support, followed by emotional assistance and practical support as the most helpful types of support that they received. Practical and emotional assistance characterized the most commonly reported types of support that they provided to family members. Black Caribbean adolescents were more likely than African American adolescents to report financial and practical assistance as the most helpful types of support that they received from family members; no ethnic differences were observed in the provision of support to relatives. There were no significant gender differences in the receipt of support, but adolescent girls reported greater involvement in providing emotional support and caregiving than adolescent boys. The results of this paper reveal that African American and Black Caribbean adolescents are involved in a complex pattern of reciprocal support exchanges with their extended family members. Study findings also reinforce the importance of research focused on racial/ethnic and gender differences in family support exchanges in order to develop a more nuanced understanding of family support behaviors within these groups.

Full text

healthcare
Article
Ethnic and Gender Differences in Family Social
Support among Black Adolescents
Christina J. Cross 1, *ID , Robert Joseph Taylor 2and Linda M. Chatters 3
1Department of Sociology, Gerald R. Ford School of Public Policy, University of Michigan,
Ann Arbor, MI 48109, USA
2School of Social Work, Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109, USA;
rjtaylor@umich.edu
3School of Public Health, School of Social Work, Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan,
Ann Arbor, MI 48109, USA; chatters@umich.edu
*Correspondence: crosscj@umich.edu
Received: 28 January 2018; Accepted: 28 February 2018; Published: 2 March 2018
Abstract:
This study examines black adolescents’ reports of the most helpful types of social support
that they receive from and provide to family members, and whether family support exchanges vary
by ethnicity (African American vs. Black Caribbean) and gender. Data for this study are from the
National Survey of American Life Adolescent Supplement (NSAL-A), a national, probability sample
of African American and Black Caribbean youth (ages 13–17). Overall, youth reported financial
support, followed by emotional assistance and practical support as the most helpful types of support
that they received. Practical and emotional assistance characterized the most commonly reported
types of support that they provided to family members. Black Caribbean adolescents were more
likely than African American adolescents to report financial and practical assistance as the most
helpful types of support that they received from family members; no ethnic differences were observed
in the provision of support to relatives. There were no significant gender differences in the receipt
of support, but adolescent girls reported greater involvement in providing emotional support and
caregiving than adolescent boys. The results of this paper reveal that African American and Black
Caribbean adolescents are involved in a complex pattern of reciprocal support exchanges with their
extended family members. Study findings also reinforce the importance of research focused on
racial/ethnic and gender differences in family support exchanges in order to develop a more nuanced
understanding of family support behaviors within these groups.
Keywords: extended family; social support; support networks; race/ethnicity; adolescence
1. Introduction
Social support from family members plays a key role in the wellbeing and development
of adolescents [
1
]. Family social support has been known to help shape adolescents’ personal
competencies, self-concept, and self-esteem [
1
–
3
], facilitate social and emotional adjustment [
4
–
8
], and
aid in developing positive racial/ethnic identities among minority youth [
9
,
10
]. Despite increased
recognition of family social support for youth developmental outcomes, few studies focus on ethnic
minorities. Further, research on black adolescents and within-group heterogeneity for this population,
is especially limited. Consequently, little is known about how family members are most helpful to
black adolescents, and the ways in which youth, in turn, are most helpful to their family members.
This study seeks to address these gaps by examining black adolescents’ reports of social support
exchanged with family (both received and provided) and the extent to which family support exchanges
vary by ethnicity (African American vs. Black Caribbean) and gender. The literature review begins
with an overview of social exchange theory as a theoretical framework for this study, followed by
Healthcare 2018,6, 20; doi:10.3390/healthcare6010020 www.mdpi.com/journal/healthcare

Healthcare 2018,6, 20 2 of 13
a review of research on African American and Black Caribbean family social support. This section
concludes by describing the focus of the present investigation and proposing relevant hypotheses
regarding ethnic, gender and sociodemographic differences in adolescent family support exchanges.
1.1. Social Exchange Theory
Social exchange theory (SET) posits that social behavior and interactions among individuals
are a result of an exchange process; that is, a series of interdependent transactions that generate
obligations and a sense of interpersonal attachment [
11
–
13
]. SET theorists maintain that certain rules
and norms of exchange are “the guidelines” of exchange processes, and reciprocity or repayment
in-kind is widely considered the fundamental principle of exchange [
11
,
13
]. Many scholars assert that
how reciprocity is construed and achieved depends, in part, on the nature of the social relationship
between exchange partners. Relationships that are short-term and less emotionally close typically
require immediate, in-kind reciprocity for support exchanges. In long-term and close-knit relationships,
however, reciprocity may emerge over an extended period of time and involve comparable, but not
necessarily identical forms of exchanges [
13
,
14
]. An individual might expect swift and exact repayment
for money borrowed by a co-worker but may accept a more delayed and potentially different form
of repayment from a family member. Thus, SET emphasizes the importance of reciprocity in social
exchanges including, but not limited to, family social support.
Further, SET maintains that the nature of the relationship between exchange partners, as well
as sociodemographic characteristics such as race/ethnicity and gender, are important in shaping the
form that reciprocity takes [
13
]. With regard to race/ethnicity, research indicates that Black Americans,
as compared to Black Caribbeans are more frequently in contact with and more likely to have daily
interaction with family members [
15
], likely because of high levels of geographic dispersion among
Black Caribbean families [
16
,
17
]. They are also more involved with congregation support networks
than Black Caribbeans, and report receiving higher levels of emotional support from congregation
members [
15
]. With respect to gender, women, are more likely than men to exchange emotional
support with family members and to provide more child care and care to ill family members [
13
,
18
].
Demonstrated gendered differences in social networks indicate that women have more extensive social
ties than men, are socialized at an early age to fulfill gender-specific functional roles (e.g., caregiving
and household work), and are more involved in emotional work (e.g., kin-keeping) within their
families [19,20].
1.2. African American and Black Caribbean Family Social Support
Prior research indicates that African American and Black Caribbean families engage in complex
webs of support exchange that function to redistribute resources and reduce economic risks [
21
–
26
].
Family support networks operate with informal norms and expectations of reciprocity among members
and involve exchanges of substantial amounts of emotional, practical, and financial support [
21
,
27
–
31
].
The few studies focusing specifically on black adolescents indicate that youths report receiving
high levels of emotional support, parental supervision, and discipline from family members [
32
–
34
].
Further, black youth also report providing various forms of practical and emotional assistance to
family members, such as help with household chores, childcare, and emotional support [
9
,
26
,
35
,
36
].
Gender differences in black adolescents’ reports of family social support, indicate that adolescent boys
are more likely to report greater levels of support from male family members (e.g., fathers or uncles)
than adolescent girls [
34
,
37
,
38
]. Further, recent research examining ethnic differences in family support
networks documents that African American and Black Caribbean families have distinctive patterns of
kin support involvement [30,39,40].
1.3. Focus of the Present Investigation
This study seeks to add to the literature on the family social support networks of black adolescents
by identifying the most helpful types of support that are received and provided by these youths,

Healthcare 2018,6, 20 3 of 13
and whether family support exchanges vary by ethnicity and gender. Given the documented
importance of family supports for adolescent development, understanding the types of family support
that black youth exchange within their family systems can better inform family policies and practices
that promote adolescent adjustment and wellbeing.
2. Methods
2.1. Sample
This analysis is based on data from the National Survey of American Life Adolescent sample
(NSAL-A), a supplemental study of adolescents who were attached to adult households from the
National Survey of American Life (NSAL). The NSAL is a stratified, multistage area probability sample
of 3570 African Americans, 1621 Black Caribbeans, and 891 non-Hispanic White adults that was
collected by the Program for Research on Black Americans at the University of Michigan’s Institute
for Social Research. Data collection took place between February 2001 and June 2003, and the study
focuses on social support, psychological and environmental stressors, and mental health disorders
(see [41,42], for more detailed information about the NSAL and NSAL-A).
The adolescent sample of the 2001–2003 NSAL was drawn from the African American and Black
Caribbean households only. Every household that included an adult participant in the NSAL was
screened for an eligible adolescent (13–17 years of age) living in the household; adolescents were then
selected using a randomized procedure. If more than one adolescent in the household was eligible,
up to two adolescents were selected for the study, and if possible, the second adolescent was of a
different gender [
42
]. A total of 1170 face-to-face interviews were conducted, including 810 African
American and 360 Black Caribbean adolescents. Interview questions asked respondents about their
demographic characteristics, employment, school activities, religious beliefs, psychological wellbeing,
and various forms of social support. NSAL-A survey weights were designed to adjust for variation in
probabilities of selection within households, and nonresponse rates for adolescents and households.
The weighted data were poststratified to approximate the national population distributions for
gender (male and female subjects) and age (13-, 14-, 15-, 16-, and 17-year-old) subgroups among
black youth [
42
]. The weighting process allows us to make accurate inferences about the national
population of black youth. Data collection for the NSAL-A was approved by the University of Michigan
Institutional Review Board; the data is available through the Inter-University Consortium of Political
and Social Research at the University of Michigan.
2.2. Measures
2.2.1. Dependent Variable
There are two main dependent variables in this analysis: The most important type of support
received from extended family members and the most important type of support given to extended
family members. The most important type of support received was derived from two questions.
First respondents were asked: “How often do people in your family—including parents, grandparents,
brothers and sisters, aunts, uncles, cousins and so on—help you out? Would you say very
often, fairly often, not too often, or never?” Respondents who reported receiving assistance
were additionally asked this open-ended question: “In what way are they most helpful to you?”
Adolescents’ first response was recorded and coded into broader categories based on content similarity
(e.g., financial assistance, transportation, advice, assistance with homework). These categories make
up the variable most important type of support received.
The most important type of support provided by adolescents to extended family members was
derived from two similar questions. Respondents were first asked: “How often do you help out people
in your family—including parents, brothers and sisters, grandparents, aunts, uncles, cousins and so
on? Would you say very often, fairly often, not too often, or never? Respondents who indicated that

Healthcare 2018,6, 20 4 of 13
they provided assistance were then asked the open-ended question: “In what ways are you most
helpful?” Adolescents’ first response was recorded and coded into broader categories based on content
similarity (e.g., help with chores/work/errands, help with child care/elder care). These categories
make up the variable, most important type of support provided.
Bivariate analysis was conducted on the all of the categories of the most important type of support
received and the most important type of support provided. Multivariate analyses were conducted on
responses that had 100 or more cases.
2.2.2. Independent Variables
Ethnicity, age, gender, and income are variables of interest that are used to explore possible
differences in the most helpful forms of support black adolescents report receiving and giving to family.
Ethnicity is a binary variable indicating whether the respondent is African American (reference) or
Black Caribbean. To determine ethnicity, respondents first self-identified their race as Black. Individuals
were then coded as Black Caribbean if they (a) answered affirmatively that they were of West Indian or
Caribbean descent; (b) said they were from a country included on a list of Caribbean area countries
presented by the interviewers, or (c) indicated that their parents or grandparents were born in a
Caribbean area country. Age is coded in years and gender is a binary variable specifying whether the
respondent is male (reference) or female. Family income is coded in dollars.
2.2.3. Analysis Strategy
We conducted descriptive analyses to document the most useful types of support that adolescents
provided to and received from family members and to describe the demographic characteristics of
the sample. The Rao-Scott chi-square statistic, a complex design-corrected measure of association,
was used to test for whether the types of support reported as most helpful by adolescents differed
by ethnicity and gender. Bivariate analysis was conducted on all mentions of the most important
type of assistance except when the number of cases was too small. Logistic regression analysis was
conducted on all mentions of the most important type of support received or given which had at
least 100 cases. Logistic regression analyses assessed whether any observed ethnic and/or gender
differences remained after taking into account two important demographic factors which have known
associations with support exchanges, age and family income. Computations for the distribution of
the sociodemographic characteristics and chi-square and logistic regression analyses were conducted
using SAS 9.1.3 (SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC, USA), which uses the Taylor expansion approximation
technique for calculating the complex design-based estimates of variance. All analyses utilize sampling
weights to account for the complex multistage clustered design of the NSAL-A sample, unequal
probabilities of selection, and post-stratification to produce nationally representative population
estimates and standard errors that are generalizable to the African American and Black Caribbean
adolescent populations.
3. Results
3.1. Description of Sample
Overall, African Americans make up the majority of the sample (69%), and Black Caribbeans
comprise (31%) of sample members. In both the African American and Black Caribbean samples,
the average respondent age is 15 years, and both groups are roughly evenly split between male and
female participants. African American adolescents have average family incomes that are slightly lower
than their Black Caribbean peers, with annual reported incomes of $38,292 and $38,830, respectively.
3.2. Receiving Support
Table 1presents analysis of ethnic and gender differences in the most helpful type of support
received from family members. Overall, “finances, money, getting needed things” was the most

Healthcare 2018,6, 20 5 of 13
frequently reported form of support received by adolescents (n= 220), followed by “direction, advice,
teaching right from wrong” (n= 185), and help with “school, homework” (n= 182). Combined,
these three categories (n= 587) represent approximately 50% of all participants’ responses. In contrast,
“not causing worry/trouble; being obedient; good grades” (n= 1), help with “sports” (n= 3), and help
“when sick/injured” (n= 3) were the least frequently reported forms of support. Taking into account
ethnicity, there were no bivariate statistically significant differences in the types of support received
by African American and Black Caribbean adolescents. However, there were a couple of statistically
significant gender differences in the receipt of support. Adolescent girls in comparison to adolescent
boys more frequently reported that “direction, advice, teaching right from wrong” or “can talk to
them when in trouble/have problems” were the most helpful support they received from extended
family members.
Table 2displays odds ratios from logistic regression analyses on ethnic and gender differences
in the largest categories reported as the most helpful type of support received from family members.
When we include demographic controls for age and income in our logistic regressions, the gender
differences that we observe in bivariate analysis of the receipt of support are no longer significant.
We do note a couple of differences by ethnicity. Black Caribbeans are more likely to report that help
with “finances, money” and “when in trouble, having problems” are the most helpful types of support
that they receive, relative to their African American counterparts. Additionally, we see that older
adolescents, compared to younger adolescents are less likely to report help with “school, homework”
as the most helpful type of support received, and they are more likely to report that assistance with
“finances, money” is the most helpful type of support received. Further, adolescents from higher
income households are less likely to name help with “finances, money” as the most helpful form of
support they receive and are more likely to identify “advice, help with moral direction” as the most
helpful type of support that they received, relative to adolescents from lower income families.

Healthcare 2018,6, 20 6 of 13
Table 1. Types of support African American adolescents and Black Caribbean adolescents receive from extended family members a.
Types of Support Total African
American Boys
African
American Girls
Black
Caribbean Boys
Black
Caribbean Girls Ethnicity Gender Overall b
N% (n) % (n) % (n) % (n)X2X2X2
Finances, money, getting needed things 220 29.55 (65) 37.73 (83) 14.09 (31) 18.64 (41) 0.26 1.53 1.73
Direction, advice, Teaching right from wrong 185 38.92 (72) 31.35 (58) 16.76 (31) 12.97 (24) 0.26 6.96 ** 6.62
School, homework 182 33.52 (61) 31.32 (57) 14.84 (27) 20.33 (37) 1.50 0.08 2.61
Support; love; caring; comfort 102 35.29 (36) 35.29 (36) 8.82 (9) 20.59 (21) 0.19 0.48 3.35
When in trouble/have problems 100 28.00 (28) 39.00 (39) 11.00 (11) 22.00 (22) 0.15 3.08 3.58
Anything and everything; always there for me/them 86 33.72 (29) 31.40 (27) 12.79 (11) 22.09 (19) 0.55 0.03 2.03
Basics (food, clothing and shelter) 79 31.65 (25) 40.51(32) 16.46 (13) 11.39 (9) 0.47 0.02 2.48
Can talk to them/me 52 15.38 (8) 46.15 (24) 17.31 (9) 21.15 (11) 1.30 4.71 * 7.70
Take care of me/them; good job of parenting 24 45.83 (11) 33.33 (8) 8.33 (2) 12.50 (3) N/A N/A N/A
Help with chores/work/errands 23 56.52 (13) 26.09 (6) 17.39 (4) 0 N/A N/A N/A
Transportation 22 40.91 (9) 27.27 (6) 22.73 (5) 9.09 (2) 0.00 N/A 2.83
Religious support 14 21.43 (3) 50.00 (7) 21.43 (3) 7.14 (1) N/A N/A N/A
Help with child care/elder care 7 0 100 (7) 0 0 N/A N/A N/A
Do things, help do things 6 33.33 (2) 66.67 (4) 0 0 N/A N/A N/A
Help when sick/injured 3 0 100 (3) 0 0 N/A N/A N/A
Sports 3 100 (3) 0 0 0 N/A N/A N/A
Not causing worry/trouble; being obedient; good grades
1 0 0 100 (1) 0 N/A N/A N/A
Total 1170 33.93 (397) 35.30 (413) 14.1 (165) 16.7 (195)
a
Percentage values are weighted; frequencies are unweighted. * p< 0.05; ** p< 0.01; *** p< 0.001;
b
Overall column refers to differences by ethnicity and gender in the types of social
support most frequently received by adolescents.
Table 2.
Logistic regression analyses of the most important type of support received from extended family members among African American and Black
Caribbean adolescents.
Independent Variables
Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Model 4 Model 5
Finances, Money Advice, Moral
Direction School, Homework Emotional Support, Caring, Comfort When in Trouble, Having Problems
OR (95% C.I.) OR (95% C.I.) OR (95% C.I.) OR (95% C.I.) OR (95% C.I.)
Ethnicity
Black Caribbean 1.59 (1.12, 2.28) * 0.69 (0.40, 1.18) 1.13 (0.45, 2.85) 0.73 (0.26, 2.08) 1.57 (1.02, 2.41) *
Age 1.27 (1.10, 1.48) ** 0.94 (0.81, 1.09) 0.80 (0.71, 0.91) ** 1.08 (0.90, 1.29) 1.05 (0.89, 1.24)
Gender
Female 1.32 (0.87, 2.00) 0.72 (0.51, 1.02) 0.89 (0.56, 1.40) 0.91 (0.56, 1.47) 1.14 (0.72, 1.81)
Household Income 0.94 (0.90, 0.99) * 1.02 (1.00, 1.04) * 1.00 (0.99, 1.01) 1.02 (1.00, 1.04) 0.98 (0.95, 1.02)
F 6.04 *** 2.62 3.20 * 1.17 2.06
Df 40 40 40 40 40
N 1115 1115 1115 1115 1115
*p< 0.05; ** p< 0.01; *** p< 0.001; OR = Odds Ratio; CI = Confidence Interval.

Healthcare 2018,6, 20 7 of 13
3.3. Providing Support
Table 3shows analysis of ethnic and gender differences in the most helpful type of support
provided by adolescents, “help with chores/work/errands” was by far the most frequently reported
n= 431), followed by “help with child care/elder care” (n= 124), and “support; love; caring; comfort”
(n= 74). Together, these three categories (n= 635) characterize approximately 60% of all participants’
responses. The least common types of helpful support reported were “basics (food, clothing and
shelter)” (n= 1), help with “sports” (n= 1), and “take care of me/them; good job of parenting” (n= 4).
Again, we observe no statistically significant ethnic differences in the provision of most helpful type
of support. Adolescent girls, however, differed from adolescent boys in several types of support
that they more frequently provided to family members: (1) “direction, advice, teaching right from
wrong”; (2) “getting needed things”; (3) “anything/everything; always there for them”; (4) “can talk to
me”; (5) “when in trouble/have problems”, and (6) help with child care/elder care. Adolescent boys
indicated that they helped with “chores/work/errands” and provided “finances, money and obtained
needed things” more frequently than adolescent girls.
Table 4reports odds ratios from logistic regression models on the most frequently reported most
helpful type of support provided to family members. When we take into account age and income,
we observe that adolescent girls are still substantially (2.5 times) more likely to report assistance with
“child care, elder care” as the most helpful type of support that they provide, relative to adolescent
boys. Additionally, older youths are less likely to report help with “chores, errands” as the most
helpful type of support provided, compared to their younger counterparts.

Healthcare 2018,6, 20 8 of 13
Table 3. Types of support African American adolescents and Black Caribbean adolescents provide to extended family members a.
Types of Support Total African
American Boys
African
American Girls
Black Caribbean
Boys
Black Caribbean
Girls Ethnicity Gender Overall b
N% (n) % (n) % (n) % (n)X2X2X2
Help with chores/work/errands 431 36.19 (156) 30.63 (132) 16.94 (73) 16.24 (70) 2.00 8.67 ** 10.41 *
Help with child care/elder care 124 22.58 (28) 46.77 (58) 6.45 (8) 24.19 (30) 0.00 19.92 *** 20.82 ***
Support; love; caring; comfort 74 33.78 (25) 37.84 (28) 17.57 (13) 10.81 (8) 0.21 0.39 2.26
Anything/everything; always there for them 71 49.30 (35) 21.13 (15) 12.68 (9) 16.90 (12) 0.05 6.06 * 10.33 *
Finances, money, getting needed things 57 49.12 (28) 31.58 (18) 12.28 (7) 7.02 (4) 3.70 4.42 * 8.10 *
Can talk to them 53 28.30 (15) 49.06 (26) 5.66 (3) 16.98 (9) 1.72 4.32 * 6.12
Direction, advice, teaching right from wrong 53 24.53 (13) 39.62 (21) 9.43 (5) 26.42 (14) 0.68 4.32 * 5.83
When sick/injured 52 26.92 (14) 42.31 (22) 13.46 (7) 17.31 (9) 0.00 1.23 1.42
When in trouble/have problems 46 21.74 (10) 50.00 (23) 8.70 (4) 19.57 (9) 0.14 5.85 * 6.04
School, homework 31 29.03 (9) 41.94 (13) 16.13 (5) 12.90 (4) 0.04 0.09 0.86
Do things, help do things 30 43.33 (13) 36.67 (11) 10.00 (3) 10.00 (3) N/A N/A N/A
Electronics/technical 11 27.27 (3) 18.18 (2) 54.55 (6) 0 N/A N/A N/A
Not causing worry/trouble; being obedient; good grades 10 60.00 (6) 20.00 (2) 0 20.00 (2) N/A N/A N/A
Good example for others; keep others from getting in trouble 9 33.33 (3) 33.33 (3) 33.33 (3) 0 N/A N/A N/A
Transportation 8 0 50.00 (4) 37.50 (3) 12.50 (1) N/A N/A N/A
Do their hair 6 0 83.33 (5) 0 16.67 (1) N/A N/A N/A
Take care of them; good job of parenting 4 50.00 (2) 0 25.00 (1) 25.00 (1) N/A N/A N/A
Religious support 2 50.00 (1) 50.00 (1) 0 0 N/A N/A N/A
Basics (food, clothing and shelter) 1 100 (1) 0 0 0 N/A N/A N/A
Sports 1 0 100 (1) 0 0 N/A N/A N/A
Total 1080 33.93 (397) 35.30 (413) 14.1 (165) 16.7 (195) 173.1 *** 1.65 175.05 ***
a
Percentage values are weighted; frequencies are unweighted. * p< 0.05; ** p< 0.01; *** p< 0.001;
b
Overall column refers to differences by ethnicity and gender in the types of social
support most frequently provided by adolescents.

Healthcare 2018,6, 20 9 of 13
Table 4.
Logistic regression analyses of the most important type of support provided to extended
family members among African American and Black Caribbean adolescents.
Independent Variables
Model 1 Model 2
Chores, Errand Child Care, Elder Care
OR (95% C.I.) OR (95% C.I.)
Ethnicity
Black Caribbean 1.46 (0.60, 3.55) 1.15 (0.43, 3.06)
Age 0.84 (0.73, 0.97) * 1.11 (0.92, 1.34)
Gender
Female 0.69 (0.48, 1.00) 2.54 (1.37, 4.69) **
Household Income 1.00 (0.99, 1.02) 0.99 (0.95, 1.03)
F 2.57 5.03 **
Df 40 40
N 1074 1074
*p< 0.05; ** p< 0.01; *** p< 0.001; OR = Odds Ratio; CI = Confidence Interval.
4. Discussion
This study examined the most helpful types of support that black adolescents received
from and provided to extended family members, and whether these support exchanges varied
across ethnicity and gender. Overall, we see that African American and Black Caribbean youth
reported financial support (i.e., “finances, money, getting needed things”), followed by emotional
assistance (i.e., “direction, advice, teaching right from wrong”) and practical support (i.e., help with
“school/homework”) as the most helpful types of support that they received. Practical (i.e., “help with
chores/work/errands” and “help with child care/elder care”) and emotional assistance (i.e., support;
love; caring; comfort) characterized the most commonly reported types of support that these youths
provided to family members.
These findings suggest that while black adolescents engage in reciprocal support exchanges
with family members, the types of reciprocated support may be different. That is to say, the type
of support adolescents receive from family members is often different from what they provide to
family members. Sarkisian and Gerstel (2004) [4] refer to support exchanges of this type as involving
generalized reciprocity in which there is no strict obligation for an exchange of the same type of
support. Rather, participants provide forms of help and support, depending on their ability and
available resources. Given that most adolescents have limited financial resources, it is not surprising
that they report financial assistance as the most helpful type of support that they receive from family
members. In contrast, financial assistance was not often mentioned as one of the most helpful types
of support that they provide to family members. Further, this form of reciprocity affirms Social
Exchange Theory’s proposition that reciprocity is shaped by relationship characteristics. Specifically,
because most family relationships are characterized by emotional closeness and long-term duration,
identical forms of support reciprocity are not necessarily expected.
With regard to ethnic differences in the most helpful types of support, results from chi-square
analysis indicate that African American and Black Caribbean adolescents received and provided
similar types of support from family members. Further analysis from logistic regression models
reveal, however, two ethnic differences in the type of most helpful support received. Black Caribbean
adolescents were more likely to report assistance with “finances, money” and “when in trouble, have
problems” as the most helpful type of support that their family members give them. Similar to the
chi-square results, no ethnic differences were observed in the logistic regression analysis of most
helpful type of support provided to relatives. These findings depart from previous research focused
on family social support among adults (18 years and older), which indicates distinct ethnic differences
in patterns of both receiving and giving [
30
]. By way of explanation, African American and Black
Caribbean adolescents are more similar to one another with regard to age, family and life circumstances,

Healthcare 2018,6, 20 10 of 13
and resources than are their adult counterparts. Given this, they are similarly constrained in the types
of support that they are able to provide, and for the most part, in the types of support they find most
useful. The two noted differences in support received may reflect ethnic differences in economic
resources for these groups. Black Caribbeans have higher average household incomes than African
Americans [
43
], which may mean that they are able to provide more financial assistance to adolescents,
especially when they are “in trouble, have problems”.
Taken together, these findings provide a more nuanced portrayal of the amounts and types
of support adolescent girls and boys exchange with family members. Results from chi-square
tests of association show several differences in family social support among subgroups of black
youth. Adolescent girls were more likely than adolescent boys to report receiving emotional support
(e.g., “can talk to them”) from family members. Boys, on the other hand, indicated receiving direction,
advice, and teachings about right and wrong from their family members. In our logistic regression
analysis, however, these gender differences no longer appear significant. In terms of providing
support to family members, given their age, resources, and life circumstances, it might be expected
that adolescents’ ability and expectations to provide assistance to family members would be limited.
Somewhat surprisingly, our chi-square analyses demonstrate that adolescent girls and boys provided
several forms of practical, emotional, and financial support to family members. Assistance with
household chores and family caregiving were the most numerous categories of support provided
by adolescents. Adolescent girls were more likely than boys to report that they provide emotional
support and help with problems (e.g., “can talk to me”), moral instruction (e.g., “direction, advice,
and teachings about right and wrong”), and various forms of practical support (e.g., “help with
child care/elder care”) to family members. Adolescent boys were involved to a greater extent in
providing finances and money, “help with chores, work or errands”, and providing comprehensive
supports (e.g., “anything/everything”). When we take into account income and age in our logistic
regression analysis, we find that gender differences in “help with chores, work, or errands” are no
longer significant, but differences in “child care, elder care” remain highly significant.
These patterns of giving family support are consistent with studies of gender-role socialization
within families. Girls were involved to a greater extent than boys in providing emotional support
and caregiving. Multiple studies document that parents raise children to engage in gender-specific
interaction styles and activities in their families. Girls are encouraged to be more emotionally expressive
than boys [
19
,
20
,
44
], findings that align with research on women’s roles as “kin keepers” within
extended family networks. In a similar vein, women tend to be more socially integrated within their
extended family networks, have more frequent contact with family members, and provide help to sick
relatives [29,45–48].
All in all, results of this study demonstrate the existence of certain within-race heterogeneities
in the type and frequency of family social support received and provided by black adolescents.
These findings may help explain the differential impact of family support on various health outcomes
for subgroups of black youth. For instance, recent research finds that while family social support is
not a protective factor against obesity for African American and Black Caribbean boys and for girls
overall, it is associated with lower risk of obesity for African American girls [
49
]. On the other hand,
family support is related to lower risk of depressive symptoms for African American boys, compared to
African American girls [
50
]. Thus, because the receipt and provision of family social support operates
differently for subgroups of black youth, we might expect to observe within-group differences in
their impact on health outcomes. Therefore, while several key studies show that enhancing family
social support is an effective strategy for promoting the health and behaviors of black adolescents
(for examples see [
51
,
52
]), future work should consider how differences in the type and frequency of
family support contribute to differential outcomes for subgroups of black youth.

Healthcare 2018,6, 20 11 of 13
5. Limitations
This study is not without its limitations. First, due to the descriptive focus of this study and the
cross-sectional nature of the NSAL-A, we are unable to make causal inferences about the relationships
between sociodemographic correlates and family support behaviors among black adolescents. Second,
owing to small cell sizes, the study is not able to examine group variation (e.g., country of origin)
within this group of Black Caribbean youth. Although not ideal, this study provides substantial
strength in exploring distinctions between African American and Black Caribbean adolescents as an
initial step in understanding within-group ethnic differences for the black adolescent population.
Third, both measures of family support were self-reported and are subject to recall and social
desirability biases.
6. Conclusions
Despite these limitations, this research contributes to literature on adolescents and family social
support in several ways. The study’s use of a nationally representative sample of black adolescents
provides a unique opportunity to examine gender and ethnicity differences in the family social
support networks of black youth. It sheds light on the most important ways in which adolescents can
contribute to and benefit from their family systems, and highlights similarities and differences across
ethnic background and gender. Study findings identify both the types of support that many African
Americans and Black Caribbeans receive such as financial assistance, as well as forms of aid that are
infrequently noted as being the most important (e.g., providing hair care and grooming likely for
younger siblings). Further, these findings reinforce the importance of research focused on racial/ethnic
and gender differences in family support exchanges for developing a more nuanced understanding of
family support behaviors within these groups.
Acknowledgments: The data collection for this study was supported by the National Institute of Mental Health
(NIMH; U01-MH57716), with supplemental support from the Office of Behavioral and Social Science Research at
the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the University of Michigan. The preparation of this manuscript was
supported by grants from the National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship to Christina J. Cross
(DGE1256260), the National Institute on Aging to Robert Joseph Taylor (P30AG1528) and the National Institute
for General Medical Sciences to Linda M. Chatters (R25GM05864).
Author Contributions:
Christina J. Cross and Robert Joseph Taylor conceived and designed the study.
Robert Joseph Taylor was primarily responsible for the analysis of the data. Christina J. Cross, Robert Joseph Taylor,
and Linda M. Chatters contributed to the interpretation of the results. Christina J. Cross wrote the first draft of
the manuscript. Christina J. Cross, Robert Joseph Taylor, and Linda M. Chatters contributed to revisions of the
manuscript and approved the final version.
Conflicts of Interest:
The authors declare no conflict of interest. The funding sponsors had no role in the design
of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript, and in the
decision to publish the results.
References
1.
Gebre, A.; Taylor, R.D. Association of poor kin relations, college adjustment and psychological well-being
among African American undergraduates. J. Child Fam. Stud. 2016,26, 217–224. [CrossRef]
2.
Franco, N.; Levitt, M.J. The social ecology of middle childhood: Family support, friendship quality,
and self-esteem. Fam Relat. 1998,47, 315–321. [CrossRef]
3.
Tiejen, A.M. The ecology of children’s social support networks. In Children’s Social Networks and Social Support;
Belle, D., Ed.; Wiley Publishing: New York, NY, USA, 1989; pp. 37–69.
4.
Levitt, M.J.; Levitt, J.; Bustos, G.L.; Crooks, N.A.; Santos, J.D.; Telan, P.; Hodgetts, J.; Milevsky, A. Patterns of
social support in the middle childhood to early adolescent transition: Implications for adjustment. Soc. Dev.
2005,14, 398–420. [CrossRef]
5.
Milevsky, A. Compensatory patterns of sibling support in emerging adulthood: Variations in loneliness,
self-esteem, depression and life satisfaction. J. Soc. Pers. Relat. 2005,22, 743–755. [CrossRef]

Healthcare 2018,6, 20 12 of 13
6.
Taylor, R.D. Kin social undermining, adjustment and family relations among low-income African American
mothers and adolescents: Moderating effects of kin social support. J. Child Fam. Stud.
2015
,24, 1271–1284.
[CrossRef]
7.
Taylor, R.D.; Budescu, M. Family financial pressure and maternal and adolescent socioemotional adjustment:
Moderating effects of kin social support in low income African American families. J. Child Fam. Stud.
2014
,
23, 242–254. [CrossRef]
8.
Taylor, R.D.; Roberts, D. Kinship support and maternal and adolescent well-being in economically
disadvantaged African-American families. Child Dev. 1996,66, 1585–1597. [CrossRef]
9.
Harrison, A.O.; Wilson, M.N.; Pine, C.J.; Chan, S.Q.; Buriel, R. Family ecologies of ethnic minority children.
Child Dev. 1990,61, 347–362. [CrossRef]
10.
McAdoo, H.P. Families of color: Strengths that come from diversity. In Family Ethnicity; Strength in Diversity;
McAdoo, H.P., Ed.; Sage Publications: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 1999; pp. 3–14.
11.
Cropanzano, R.; Mitchell, M.S. Social exchange theory: An interdisciplinary overview. J. Manag.
2005
,
31, 874–900.
12. Emerson, R.M. Social exchange theory. Annu. Rev. Sociol. 1976,2, 335–362. [CrossRef]
13.
Wan, W.H.; Antonucci, T.C. Social exchange theory and aging. In Encyclopedia of Geropsychology; Springer:
New York, NY, USA, 2016; pp. 1–9.
14. Blau, P.M. Exchange and Power in Social Life; John Wiley: New York, NY, USA, 1964.
15.
Taylor, R.J.; Chatters, L.M.; Woodward, A.T.; Brown, E. Racial and ethnic differences in extended family,
friendship, fictive kin, and congregational informal support networks. Fam. Relat.
2013
,62, 609–624.
[CrossRef] [PubMed]
16.
Basch, L. Transnational social relations and the politics of national identity: An eastern Caribbean case
study. In Islands in the City: West Indian Migration to New York; Foner, N., Ed.; University of California Press:
Berkeley, CA, USA, 2001; pp. 117–141.
17.
Foner, N. The social effects of 9/11 on New York City: An introduction. In Wounded City: The Social Impact
of 9/11; Foner, N., Ed.; Russell Sage Foundation: New York, NY, USA, 2005; pp. 3–27.
18.
Kawachi, I.; Berkman, L.F. Social ties and mental health. J. Urban Health
2001
,78, 458–467. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
19.
Lytton, H.; Romney, D.M. Parents’ differential socialization of boys and girls: A meta-analysis. Psychol. Bull.
1991,109, 267–296. [CrossRef]
20.
Siegel, B.; Silverstein, S. What about Me? Growing up with a Developmentally Disabled Sibling; Plenum Press:
New York, NY, USA, 1994.
21.
Bashi, V.F. Survival of the Knitted: Immigrant Social Networks in a Stratified World; Stanford University Press:
Stanford, CA, USA, 2007.
22.
Garrett-Peters, R.; Burton, L.M. Tenuous ties: The nature and costs of kin support among low-income rural
black mothers. Women Gend. Fam. Color 2016,4, 4–35. [CrossRef]
23.
Gerstel, N. Rethinking families and community: The color, class, and centrality of extended kin ties. Sociol.
Forum. 2011,26, 1–20. [CrossRef]
24.
McAdoo, H.P. Black mothers and the extended family support network. In The Black Woman;
Rodgers-Rose, L.F., Ed.; Sage Publications: Beverly Hills, CA, USA, 1980; pp. 125–144.
25.
Stack, C.B. All Our Kin: Strategies for Survival in a Black Community; Harper & Row: New York, NY, USA, 1974.
26.
Waters, M.C. Black Identities: West Indian Immigrant Dreams and American Realities; Russell Sage Foundation:
New York, NY, USA, 1999.
27.
Gussler, J. Adaptive strategies and social networks of women in St. Kitts. In Family in the Caribbean:
Themes and Perspectives; Barrow, C., Ed.; Marcus Wiener: Princeton, NJ, USA, 1998; pp. 119–135.
28.
Ho, C. Salt Water Trinnies: Afro-Trinidadian Immigrants’ Networks and Non-Assimilation in Los Angles; AMS Press:
New York, NY, USA, 1991.
29.
Sarkisian, N.; Gerstel, N. Kin support among Blacks and Whites: Race and family organization.
Am. Sociol. Rev. 2004,9, 335–363. [CrossRef]
30.
Taylor, R.J.; Forsythe-Brown, I.; Lincoln, K.D.; Chatters, L.M. Extended family support networks of Caribbean
Black adults in the United States. J. Fam. Issues 2015,38, 522–546. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
31.
Taylor, R.J.; Mouzon, D.M.; Nguyen, A.W.; Chatters, L.M. Reciprocal family, friendship and church support
networks of African Americans: Findings from the National Survey of American Life. Race Soc. Probl.
2016
,
8, 326–339. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

Healthcare 2018,6, 20 13 of 13
32.
Giordano, P.C.; Cernkovich, S.A.; DeMaris, A. The family and peer relations of black adolescents.
J Marriage Fam. 1993,55, 277–287. [CrossRef]
33.
Harker, K. Immigrant generation, assimilation, and adolescent psychological well-being. Soc. Forces.
2001
,
79, 969–1004. [CrossRef]
34.
Pernice-Duca, F.M. An examination of family social support networks as a function of ethnicity and gender:
A descriptive study of youths from three ethnic reference groups. J. Youth Stud.
2010
,13, 391–402. [CrossRef]
35.
Burton, L. Childhood adultification in economically disadvantaged families: A conceptual model. Fam. Relat.
2007,59, 329–345. [CrossRef]
36.
Tseng, V. Family interdependence and academic adjustment in college: Youth from immigrant and U.S. born
families. Child Dev. 2004,75, 966–983. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
37.
Hirsh, B.J.; Mickus, M.; Boerger, R. Ties to influential adults among Black and White adolescents: Culture,
social class, and family networks. Am. J. Community Psychol. 2002,30, 289–303. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
38.
Richardson, J.B. Men do matter: Ethnographic insights on the socially supportive role of the African
American uncle in the lives of inner-city African American male youth. J. Fam. Issues
2009
,30, 1041–1069.
[CrossRef]
39.
Lincoln, K.D.; Taylor, R.J.; Chatters, L.M. Correlates of emotional support and negative interaction among
African Americans and Black Caribbeans. J. Fam. Issues 2013,34, 1262–1290. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
40.
Taylor, R.J.; Forsythe-Brown, I.; Taylor, H.O.; Chatters, L.M. Patterns of emotional social support and negative
interactions among African American and Black Caribbean extended families. J. Afr. Am. Studies
2014
,
18, 147–163. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
41.
Jackson, J.S.; Torres, M.; Caldwell, C.H.; Neighbors, H.W.; Nesse, R.N.; Taylor, R.J.; Trierweiler, S.J.;
Williams, D.R. The National Survey of American Life: A study of racial, ethnic and cultural influences on
mental disorders and mental health. Int. J. Methods Psychiatr. Res. 2004,13, 196–207. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
42.
Seaton, E.K.; Caldwell, C.H.; Sellers, R.M.; Jackson, J.S. The prevalence of perceived discrimination among
African American and Caribbean Black youth. Dev. Psychol. 2008,44, 1288. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
43.
Anderson, M. A Rising Share of the U.S. Black Population Is Foreign Born; 9 Percent Are Immigrants; and While
Most Are from the Caribbean, Africans Drive Recent Growth; Pew Research Center: Washington, DC, USA, 2015.
44.
Adams, S.; Kuebli, J.; Boyle, P.A.; Fivush, R. Gender differences in parent-child conversations about past
emotions: A longitudinal investigation. Sex Roles 1995,33, 309–323. [CrossRef]
45.
Antonucci, T.C. Antonucci, T.C. A life-span view of women’s social relations. In Women Growing Older:
Psychological Perspectives; Turner, B.F., Ed.; Sage Publications: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 1994; pp. 239–269.
46.
Nguyen, A.W.; Chatters, L.M.; Taylor, R.J. African American extended family and church-based social
network typologies. Fam. Relat. 2016,65, 701–715. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
47.
Taylor, R.J.; Chatters, L.M. Extended family networks of older Black adults. J. Gerontol.
1991
,46, S210–S217.
[CrossRef] [PubMed]
48.
Taylor, R.J.; Lincoln, K.D.; Chatters, L.M. Correlates of emotional support and negative interaction among
older Black Americans. J. Fam. Issues. 2003,58, S225–S233.
49.
Assari, S.; Caldwell, C.H. Low family social support and risk of obesity among Black youth: Role of gender
and ethnicity. Children 2017,4, 36. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
50.
Assari, S.; Smith, J.R.; Caldwell, C.H.; Zimmerman, M.A. Gender differences in longitudinal links between
neighborhood fear, parental support, and depression, and African American Emerging Adults. Societies
2015
,
5, 151–170. [CrossRef]
51.
Caldwell, C.H.; Rafferty, J.; Reischi, T.M.; De Loney, E.H.; Brooks, C.L. Enhancing parenting skills among
nonresident African American fathers as a strategy for preventing youth risky behaviors. Am. J. Community
Psychol. 2010,45, 17–35. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
52.
Caldwell, C.H.; Antonakos, C.L.; Assari, S.; Kruger, D.; De Loney, E.H.; Njai, R. Pathways to prevention:
Improving nonresident African American fathers’ parenting skills and behaviors to reduce sons’ aggression.
Child Dev. 2013,85, 308–325. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
©
2018 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).