1. Objectifs

Questions/Hypothèses :
« It was hypothesized that the disruptive boys and their mothers would have fewer positive interactions than the nondisruptive boys and their mothers. Given that the boys’ disruptiveness classification was based on teacher ratings it was anticipated that these boys would act negatively towards both mothers. It was thought that the mothers of the disruptive sons however would behave more positively toward the boys who were not expected to vary in their behavior toward the two groups of boys. » (p. 547)

2. Méthode

Échantillon/Matériau :
- « The eighty-two mother-sons dyads who participated in the present study are a subsample of a cohort of french-speaking Canadian boys (n=1037) who originated from low-socioeconomic neighborhoods in Montreal Canada. » (p. 548)
- « [...] 13 year-old boys with their biological mothers and with another mother while the boys engaged in a difficult computer task. Four groups were studied. » (p. 547)

Instruments :
- Short Behavior Questionnaire (SBQ) (Tremblay et al. 1991);
- Short Michigan Alcohol Screening Test (SMAST) (Selzer, 1971; Selzer et al. 1975).

Type de traitement des données :
Analyse statistique

3. Résumé

« The goal of the study was to describe mother-son relations in adolescent sons of male alcoholics. Method: Eighty-two mother-son dyads were observed in a laboratory setting. They were subdivided in 4 groups: sons of male alcoholics (SOMAs) with and without behavioral problems, boys who were not SOMAs but had behavioral problems and controls. Disruptive boys were included and distinguished from SOMAs because while there is often co-occurence of these two problems they are not always found in the same individual.
Results: It was found that the biological mothers of the disruptive boys were less supportive and nurturing of their sons than were the other mothers. They were also rated as less mature, more anxious, and less confident on themselves as parents. There were no significant findings for the SOMAs on their mothers whose interactions ressembled the control group. It is possible that sons of male alcoholics differences may be due to the disruptiveness of the boys rahter than to their family alcoholic status perse. » (p. 546)