Measures

An overview of study measures is provided in Appendix A.

All nine indicators were single items that assessed adolescents’ expectations for their futures. Each indicator was presented with the stem, “When you get older, how likely is it that you will…” with specific items including, “get married”, “have children”, “pass on a religious or spiritual tradition to your own children”, “have a fulfilling career”, “have a stable and well-paying job”, “go to college”, “contribute to your country”, “help your country heal old wounds”, and “help others in your community”. The response scale ranged from 1 (Extremely unlikely) to 5 (Extremely likely).

Grade level was assessed with a single item ranging from 7^th - 12^th grade.

Mother and father education were assessed separately with a single item each. The response options were no schooling, primary school, secondary school, high school, or above high school.

Gender was assessed with a single item and was coded as 1=Female, 0=Male.

Locus of control (LOC) was assessed using seven items about the extent to which adolescents felt like they had control over themselves and the things that happen to them (also sometimes referred to as "mastery"; Pearlin & Schooler, 1978; Rotter, 1966). The response scale ranged from 1 (Strongly disagree) to 5 (Strongly agree). The scale performed poorly, however, when negatively-worded items were included, so a single index was calculated as the average of the two positively-worded items only, with higher scores indicating stronger internal LOC. These items were: “What happens to me in the future mostly depends on me” and “I can do just about anything I really set my mind to”. The Pearson correlation between the two items was r = 0.31. Given that Cronbach’s alpha is impacted by the number of items in the scale, the Spearman-Brown correction was applied (see Eisinga et al., 2013), revealing that lengthening the scale by a factor of three would result in a reliability of 0.73 (assuming the same relations between variables).

Family obligation was assessed using 13 items about the extent to which adolescents felt a sense of obligation to show respect and provide future support to their families (Fuligni & Pedersen, 2002; Fuligni et al., 1999). This measure has two subscales, “respect for family” (seven items) and “future support” (six items). The respect for family subscale included items such as, “how important is it to you that you… ‘make sacrifices for your family’, ‘respect your older brothers and sisters’, and ‘do well for the sake of your family’”. The future support subscale included items such as, “how important is it to you that in the future you… ‘help your parents/adult caregivers financially in the future’, ‘spend time with your parents/adult caregivers even after you no longer live with them’, and ‘help take care of your brothers and sisters in the future’. Both subscales used response ratings ranging from 1 (Very unimportant) to 5 (Very important). Factor analysis indicated that all 13 items loaded strongly on a single factor. Thus, all items were averaged to create a single measure of family obligation, with higher scores indicating stronger beliefs about the importance of family obligation. The Cronbach’s alpha achieved by this measure was α = 0.82.

Mother closeness was assessed using five items about the extent of closeness and connection adolescents felt with their mothers, adapted from the trust and communication scales of the Inventory of Parent and Peer Relationships (IPPA; Armsden & Greenberg, 1987). The response scale ranged from 1 (Completely untrue) to 5 (Completely true). Following previous research (Fosco et al., 2016), a single index measuring the quality of adolescent’s relationships with their mothers was calculated as the average of all items, labeled closeness. Higher scores indicated stronger feelings of closeness. An example item is, “I tell my mother about my problems and troubles”. Reliability for this measure was α = 0.66.

As with mother closeness, father closeness was assessed using the same five items about the extent of closeness and connection adolescents felt, this time with their fathers. The response scale ranged from 1 (Completely untrue) to 5 (Completely true). A single index was calculated as the average of all items, with higher scores indicating stronger feelings of closeness. An example item is, “My father encourages me to talk about my difficulties”. Reliability for this measure was α = 0.78.