Adolescent Life Satisfaction and Its Relationship with Triadic Family
Interactions and Mental Health
Authors:   , Álvarez Kozubová Karla 
Published: November 2024

Adolescents experience changes, discomfort and increased risk of
psychopathology (Vicente et al., 2012), whose approach has been insufficient
from the perspective focused on vulnerability/risk. The multidimensional
perspective of health that considers protective and opportunity factors of
development (Steinberg, 2014) becomes important. Subjective well-being (SWB) has
been positioned as a multidimensional health assessment (Suldo & Shaffer,
2008), and the life satisfaction construct (LS) (Diener et al., 1985) as the
most stable measure of SWB in constituting the overall judgment of the
adolescents regarding their lives and the achievement of their aspirations,
values and interests influenced by culture (Eid & Diener, 2004; Maddux,
2018; Seligman, 2011) in addition to their discomfort or symptoms. Objectives:
to assess the relationship between life satisfaction, quality of triadic
interactions (QIT) and mental health (MH) characteristics (risk and protection)
in two groups of Chilean adolescents. Method: casecontrol study (Case: 30 triads
with adolescent receiving care in mental health and Control: 15 triads with
adolescent not receiving), non-experimental, cross-sectional with correlational
analysis. Measurement with self-report and observational methodology was used
(Satisfaction with Life Scale Adapted for Children, Family APGAR, Parenting
Alliance Inventory, Relationship Assessment Scale, Strengths and Difficulties
Questionnaire, Millon Adolescent Clinical Inventory, KIDSCREEN-52, Survey of
Variables Associated with Life Satisfaction and Lausanne Trilogue Play).
Results: in the case group, adolescents self-reported significantly lower LS and
lower perception of protective mental health factors, higher levels of
internalizing and externalizing problems, and on average, each adolescent
reported more expressed concerns, clinical syndromes and personality prototypes.
The QTI, triad structure and dynamics, and co-parenting observed were
significantly lower. Meanwhile, triad involvement and adolescent 14 engagement
was similar in both groups. Self-reported co-parenting was significantly
different between mothers and fathers in each case triad, and mothers were less
satisfied in the co-parenting and couple relationship domain than controls. The
relationship between adolescent APGAR and that of their respective father figure
was inverse in both groups. Case group adolescent LS correlated negatively with
emotional and peer problems and in both groups with depressive affect and
personality traits in the pain and dependency polarities. Meanwhile, in both
groups, the association between LS, adolescent APGAR and protective factors such
as physical and psychological well-being, family, school and peer relationships,
etc. was positive. In the case group, LS correlated positively with the ability
of the triad to co-construct and focus on a task (LTP). The group variable
contributed 9.8% of the variance of LS, and the multivariate model implemented
with adolescent, father, mother and group APGARs, 52%, without maternal
perception being significant. Discussion: evaluating LS, from a context of
triadic interactions, with observational LTP methodology in middle adolescence
and case-control design, places this study as a pioneer. It is suggested to
replicate the study, correcting its limitations, mainly the sample size. In
addition, the results on the inverse relationship between paternal perception of
the family, co-parenting and couple and adolescent LS should be considered. All
of the above will make it possible to strengthen the conclusions and guide
prevention and intervention strategies, reinforcing co-parenting in families
with adolescent children.