Psychological Stress and Perceived School Success During COVID-19 Among Parents of Children Who Are Deaf or Hard of Hearing

Abstract

This study mainly explored psychological stress due to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) among parents of deaf and hard-of-hearing children and how it related to parents’ views of school success in mainland China. The Psychological Stress Questionnaire and Views of Social and Academic Success were administered to 213 parents of deaf and hard-of-hearing children. Results showed that parents’ and children’s characteristics were related to psychological stress due to COVID-19, which significantly negatively predicted parents’ views of school success. The contributions, limitations, and implications of the present research are discussed.

Keywords

psychological stress deaf and hard-of-hearing views of school success parents

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has become pandemic, and many governments have decreed restrictive measures to prevent its spread. For parents and children, staying at home is one of these measures (Narzisi, 2020). However, this situation may give rise to great stress among parents. For instance, they may worry about their family’s economic and physical health; be concerned about their children’s social isolation from peers and teachers; or be preoccupied with the management, duration, and outcomes of homeschooling (Fontanesi et al., 2020). Parents of deaf and hard-of-hearing (D/HH) children face increased pressures, including their children’s chronic emotional or behavioral difficulties or other health challenges (Coyne et al., 2020).

Several studies have explored psychological stress during previous pandemics. Since the beginning of the COVID-19 outbreak, most studies have focused on the general population rather than on parents (Brooks et al., 2020; Spinelli et al., 2020), let alone parents of deaf and hard-of-hearing children. The present research explores the psychological stress due to COVID-19 among parents of deaf and hard-of-hearing children and its correlation with parents’ views of school success in mainland China for the following three reasons.

First, in January 2020, the 2019 novel coronavirus was declared a first-level public health emergency in mainland China. On January 30, 2020, it was declared a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC) by the World Health Organization. During the outbreak period, negative emotions such as tension and anxiety began to breed, quickly spreading and iterating across mainland China (Lima et al., 2020), plunging the whole society into a psychological crisis. Within this context, Chinese people face huge work and psychological pressures that may affect their emotional state and engender psychological stress. Therefore, the psychological stress due to COVID-19 merits investigation in the context of mainland China.

Second, from 2012 to 2019, the number of students with disabilities enrolled in ordinary schools grew from 199,800 to 394,300, an increase of 97.3%. A preliminary study conducted in China has reported psychological difficulties among children during the COVID-19 pandemic, with fear, clinginess, inattention, and irritability being the most severe symptoms for younger children (Jiao et al., 2020). However, what specific COVID-19-related risk factors may lead to children’s negative outcomes and how COVID-19 lockdowns and parents’ well-being affect children’s adjustment have not been investigated yet. M. T. Wang et al. (2020) proposed that family processes, protective factors, and risk factors in the home environment should be more deeply understood to improve children’s well-being in these difficult times. This research explores one such risk factor: stress among parents of children with developmental disabilities.

Third, although studies have investigated factors influencing parental stress during COVID-19 (e.g., Wu et al., 2020), few have assessed the impact of that stress. Parental stress affects children’s development across different domains (Fontanesi et al., 2020) and influences parenting (Brown et al., 2020). Given that parental stress affects children’s developmental outcomes (Frontini et al., 2016), it is worth examining how it influences parenting (i.e., parents’ views of school success).

Parental Stress in Families with Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing Children and Its Influence on Parenting

Parental stress greatly affects not only child development but also parenting. For instance, Hintermair (2006) showed that high levels of parental stress are associated with frequent socioemotional problems in deaf and hard-of-hearing children. Quittner et al. (2010) associate both language delays and child behavior problems with increased parenting stress among parents of deaf and hard-of-hearing children. Dirks et al. (2016) found that parents of toddlers with moderate hearing loss reported comparable levels of parental stress to parents of hearing children and related children’s poorer social-emotional functioning and language ability to higher stress levels in parents. Parents who experienced less social support reported higher stress levels. Levinger and Alhuzail (2018) revealed that parenting stress affects parents’ satisfaction with the family’s everyday functioning.

In sum, although previous studies have indicated that parental stress greatly affects parenting, most studies have focused on its impact on child development. Given its importance, it is worth further exploring how parental stress influences parenting.

Studies Regarding Chinese Parents’ Views of Education

Chinese scholars have reached an agreement on parents’ views of education. For instance, Chen and He (1994) and Yu and Xin (1995) believed that parents’ views of education mainly include the concepts of talents, parent–child, children, and child education.

Studies on Chinese parents’ views of education have mainly explored the present situation of parents’ views of education and its influential factors. For example, B. Z. Li and Guan (1995) identified that parents’ concept of talent emphasizes intelligence and high expectations, parents’ concept of education focuses on morality, and parents’ concept of children recognizes children’s self-control and requires children to be dependent on adults.

Researchers have also attempted to improve parents’ views of education through interventions. For instance, D. S. Li et al. (2002) showed that after the intervention (a) parents’ views of education in the experimental class were significantly better; (b) students’ evaluation of their parents’ educational attitudes were higher in the experimental class, with the parent–child relationship having been significantly improved; and (c) problematic behavior dropped significantly, and academic performance was greatly improved among students in the experimental class relative to those in the control class.

However, these studies are outdated and only sampled one area of the country. In addition, these studies mainly explored how parents’ demographic characteristics correlated with their views of education; few focused on differences in parents’ variables. Yu and Xin (1995) argued that parents’ views of education derive from the interaction between self-construction and culture, emphasizing the importance of parents’ different views of education. Consequently, it is worthwhile to explore how different variables (i.e., psychological stress due to COVID-19) are related to parents’ views of education.

Studies Regarding Views of Education Among Parents of Children With Disabilities

Zhang and Liu (2006) found that parents of children with mild intellectual disabilities hoped their children would be interested in learning, master labor skills and habits, and master their physical development knowledge. Their children should be able to live by themselves, enter society, and be self-reliant in society. They should have a certain level of development potential and be able to master some simple labor skills. It was identified that most parents of children with intellectual disabilities indicated that their children should be able to live and work independently. However, they have low expectations (Liu et al., 2021).

More than 92% of parents of adolescents with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) who participated in the (U.S.) National Longitudinal Transitional Study (Wagner et al., 2005) expected their child to find paid employment; about 25% expected them to live independently. The parents also expected some degree of community participation. Thus, although parents of children with ASD in the United States expect their child to participate in society via employment and community activities, there is also a gap between what parents of individuals with ASD value and what they expect. Two Australian studies provided some reasons for these discrepancies. Fong et al. (1993) highlighted behavioral and communication difficulties as negatively affecting their expectations of their child’s future. Gray (2002) found that poor language skills, coupled with inappropriate and embarrassing behavior, were challenges that parents experienced, both at home and in public situations.

A large proportion of parents placed considerable importance on part- or full-time employment in the community for their daughter or son in the early years after leaving high school. Indeed, more than twice as many parents considered community employment more important than sheltered employment. When asked to rate the features of their child’s future job, parents assigned the highest importance to the workplace’s more qualitative dimensions—for example, offering personal satisfaction or matching the child’s interests (e.g., Butterworth et al., 2015; Mazzotti et al., 2016).

Studies examining how parents of children with disabilities view education have emphasized employment, education, independence, access to society, and other social outcomes (Ivey, 2004; Poon, 2013). These studies were culture-specific (Kirby, 2016; Poon, 2013) and closely related to children’s educational, vocational, social, and functional outcomes (Bush et al., 2018; Kirby, 2016). Much of the emerging research on parental expectations for children with disabilities has predominantly sampled participants from Western countries (e.g., Kirby, 2016), few in Eastern countries. Eastern cultures are typically collective cultures in which people prefer to act as a cohesive group. In contrast, Western cultures are more likely to value individualism, which prioritizes individuals’ self-interests, needs, demands, and wishes (Hofstede, 1997). Therefore, it is worthwhile exploring views of education among parents of children with disabilities in the context of mainland China.

Method

The present research explores psychological stress due to COVID-19 among parents of deaf and hard-of-hearing children and how it relates to parents’ views of school success in mainland China. Considering the importance of demographic variables to parents’ views of education (e.g., H. Z. Li, 1999), these factors must be considered when analyzing the relationships of parents’ COVID-19-related psychological stress to their views of school success.

We hypothesized that parents’ psychological stress due to COVID-19 would be negatively related to their views of school success. The hypothesis’ empirical foundations reveal that parental stress would be related to negative parenting (e.g., Shawler & Sullivan, 2017; Ueda et al., 2020; Woolfson & Grant, 2006).

Whether measures can be applied in research is determined by their reliability and validity. Hence, the psychometric properties of the Psychological Stress Questionnaire and Views of Academic and Social Success were examined before the study’s main research question was explored.

Participants

Parents in the present research were drawn from across China based on the following inclusion criteria: (a) they had D/HH children with severe to profound hearing loss (>81 dB HL) whose major communication mode was both sign and spoken language; (b) their children were educated in special schools; (c) their children lived at home with them; and (d) only one parent of each child (the primary caregiver) completed the self-report surveys. Information was not sought regarding other forms of disabilities or cochlear implants among the selected D/HH students. The final research cohort consisted of 213 parents from all 31 provinces of mainland China. See Table 1 for parents’ detailed demographic information and specific information regarding their deaf and hard-of-hearing children. As, in most Chinese families, the mother plays the major role of primary caregiver, it is unsurprising that more than two thirds of respondents were female.

Table 1.

Distribution of Parents by Demographic Data (Total Responses: 213).

Demographic variables	n(%)
Gender
Male	67 (31.5)
Female	146 (68.5)
Age (in years)
21–30	26 (12.2)
31–40	99 (46.5)
41–50	71 (33.3)
51–60 and above	17 (8)
Educational level
Below high school	159 (74.6)
High school or technical secondary school	32 (15.0)
Junior college	10 (4.7)
Above undergraduate	12 (5.6)
Family monthly income
Below 5000RMB	163 (76.5)
5000–1,0000RMB	40 (18.8)
10,000–20,000RMB	4 (1.9)
Above 20,000RMB	6 (2.8)
Number of children
One	34 (16)
Two	121 (56.8)
Three or more	58 (27.2)
Job nature
Unemployed	42 (19.7)
Part-time job	47 (22.1)
Full-time job	59 (27.7)
Full-time homework	65 (30.5)
Child grade level
Kindergarten	17 (8.0)
Primary school	120 (56.3)
Middle school	43 (20.2)
High school	30 (14.1)
University or above	3 (1.4)

Note. RMB = renminbi, the official currency of China.

Measures

A demographic sheet and the two inventories mentioned above were used to collect data. The demographic sheet was used to collect parents’ personal information (e.g., gender and educational level) and information specific to their D/HH children (i.e., grade level). The two inventories are detailed below.

The Psychological Stress Questionnaire

The Psychological Stress Questionnaire (J. Wang et al., 2020) is a newly developed Chinese measurement that uses a 5-point Likert-type scale. It includes nine items reflecting three dimensions identified by J. Wang et al. (2020): (a) risk awareness, which reflects the participant’s self-evaluated risk stoicism regarding their environment (three items); (b) physical and mental response, which reveals the participant’s stress response to the current environment (four items); and (c) optimistic hope, which mirrors how confident the participants were about defeating the epidemic and their optimism about the current outbreak (two items). A sample item for risk awareness was “What do you think is the risk of exposure to infection in your work environment?” A sample item for physical and mental response was, “Are you concerned about family members being infected?” A sample item for optimistic hope was, “Are you concerned about being infected during your work?”

This questionnaire was originally developed to investigate medical staff’s psychological stress due to COVID-19. The ranges for risk awareness, physical and mental responses, and optimistic hope were 0–15, 0–20, and 0–10, respectively. The authors invited a panel of three professors (one each from psychology, family work, and education) to evaluate and discuss the questionnaire items. The psychology professor pointed out that the items were designed to assess the psychological stress levels among the general population suffering from COVID-19, not only medical staff. The family work professor showed that parents also faced all the situations delineated in the items. The education professor agreed that the target parents (even those with a below high school educational level) could understand the items. Hence, they agreed that all items were also applicable to the targeted parents.

Views of Social and Academic Success

Views of Social and Academic Success (Ryan et al., 2010) is a self-report inventory that uses a 5-point Likert-type scale, ranging from 1 (Not at all important) to 5 (Extremely important). It was developed in English, translated into Chinese for this study, then back-translated into English. It includes two subscales: academic success and social success. Academic success contains 10 items assessing how important it was to parents that their children be academically successful (e.g., get good grades, learn math, and get the right answers). Social success contains eight items assessing how important it was to parents that their children be socially successful (e.g., show respect for teachers, follow directions, and play well with others). This inventory was demonstrated to be reliable and valid in a study conducted by Ryan et al. (2010).

Procedures and Data Analysis

First, the online questionnaire was introduced to the principals of special schools in 31 provinces by the third author, a well-known professor who had very good relationships with all the principals. The principals distributed and introduced the questionnaire to parents of children in their school and strongly encouraged their participation.

All research participants were required to complete and return informed consent forms online. The forms highlighted that their participation was voluntary and that all information obtained would be kept strictly confidential and be used only for research purposes. The demographic sheet and the inventories were administered online and took around 20 min to complete. The demographic sheet was anonymous. While parents were made aware ahead of time that they would be compensated for their participation, each was given at random a red packet with a one-in-three chance of containing a reward as a show of appreciation.

The reliability values for the two inventories aforementioned were estimated using Cronbach’s alpha coefficients, after which confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was conducted to test their validity. Descriptive statistics were also calculated.

In addition, a series of multivariate analyses of variance (MANOVAs) were conducted to explore how demographic variables are related to views of social and academic success.

Finally, multiple regressions were conducted to predict views of social and academic success from parents’ psychological stress due to COVID-19, with relevant demographic factors being controlled for; specifically, multiple regressions were performed separately for each of the two views of social and academic success scales, with parents’ psychological stress due to COVID-19 serving as predictor variables in each analysis. R² was adopted as the indicator for effect sizes, with small, medium, and large effect sizes represented by the values of 0.01, 0.09, and 0.25, respectively (Cohen, 1992).

Reliability and Validity of the Two Investigated Inventories

The internal consistency reliability of the Psychological Stress Questionnaire was .62, which is consistent with that attained by J. Wang et al. (2020). The reliability values for the academic success and social success subscales regarding Views of Social and Academic Success were .89 and .90, respectively, consistent with Ryan et al. (2010).

The CFA results indicated that three-factor psychological stress was unacceptable for parents of deaf and hard-of-hearing children. The model fit indices obtained through CFA for the one-factor psychological stress model were as follows: χ²/df = 1.8, root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) = .06, comparative fit index (CFI) = .93, goodness of fit index (GFI) = .96. Per Byrne (1989), Bentler and Bonett (1980), Browne and Cudeck (1993), and Hu and Bentler (1999), acceptable values for these fit indices are as follows: χ²/df (<1.50 to <.5.00); RMSEA (<.06 to < .10), GFI and CFI (around .90). Thus, the one-factor psychological stress model was deemed acceptable for parents of deaf and hard-of-hearing children. The standardized parameter estimates are presented in Table 2. The present research input the three dimensions into the following regression to be consistent with the original study and make the results more comparable.

Table 2.

Standardized Parameter Estimates for the One-Factor Model of Psychological Stress.

Item	Estimate
1	.29
2	.52
3	.38
4	.81
5	.74
6	.49
7	.80
8	.71
9	.80

The model fit indices obtained through CFA for the two-factor views of social and academic success model were as follows: χ²/df = 1.7, RMSEA = .06, CFI = .90, GFI = .97. Per Byrne (1989), Bentler and Bonett (1980), Browne and Cudeck (1993), and Hu and Bentler (1999), acceptable values for these fit indices are as follows: χ²/df (<1.50 to <5.00), RMSEA (<.06 to < .10), GFI and CFI (around .90). Thus, the two-factor views of social and academic success model were deemed acceptable for parents of deaf or hard-of-hearing children. The standardized parameter estimates are presented in Table 3.

Table 3.

Standardized Parameter Estimates for the Two-Factor Model of Views of Academic and Social Success.

Item	Academic success Estimate	Social success Estimate
1		.64
2	.47
3	.35
4	.53
5		.74
6		.62
7	.78
8		.69
9		.69
10	.69
11	.64
12		.84
13		.68
14		.85
15	.78
16	.89
17	.84
18	.71

Descriptive Statistics

Descriptive analysis was also conducted. Means and standard deviations for each psychological stress scale and views of academic and social success measures are reported in Table 4. As indicated, parents’ psychological stress levels were above the average score.

Table 4.

Means and Standard Deviations for Psychological Stress Questionnaire (PSQ) and Views of Academic and Social Success (VASS) Subscales.

Scale	M	SD
PSQ
Risk awareness	8.12	2.05
Physical and mental response	12.03	2.68
Optimistic hope	3.70	1.47
VASS
Academic success	39.69	6.21
Social success	32.80	5.04

MANOVAs showed that the number of children in their family significantly affects parents’ views of school success. Specifically, using Pillai’s trace (Pillai, 1960) revealed a significant effect of the number of children in their family on parents’ views of schools success, with single-child parents scoring higher than multiple-child parents, V = 0.05, F(4, 420) = 4.57, p = .04. Parents’ gender, age, educational level, family monthly income, and job nature did not affect parents’ views of school success. Mothers scored higher on views of academic success than fathers, while fathers scored higher on views of social success. The younger the parent, the higher their scores on views of schools success. Parents with a junior college educational level scored highest on views of school success. Parents with a monthly family income of <5,000 RMB (see Note) scored higher on views of academic success than other parents, whereas parents with a monthly family income of 10,000–20,000 RMB scored higher on views of social success than other parents. Unemployed parents scored highest on views of school success. Parents with children in kindergarten scored higher on views of school success than other parents.

Predicting Views of Children’s School Success From Parents’ Psychological Stress Due to COVID-19

Hierarchical multiple regression analyses were used to test the hypothesis that parents’ psychological stress due to COVID-19 would negatively relate to their views of children’s school success. Results showed that, as predicted, one dimension of parents’ psychological stress due to COVID-19 significantly negatively predicted their views of children’s school success. However, contrary to the hypothesis, physical and mental responses significantly positively predicted their views of children’s school success. Please see Table 5 for details.

Table 5.

Predicting View of Children’s School Success Based on Parent Psychological Stress Caused by COVID-19.

Predictor variables	Academic success	Social success
R₂	.05	.07
β_pmr	.36*	.38**
β_oh	−.91	−.79**
F	4.55	6.59
df	(3,209)	(3,209)

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

Discussion

The principal objective of this study was to investigate psychological stress due to COVID-19 among parents of deaf and hard-of-hearing children and its correlation with parents’ views of school success in mainland China. To that end, a preliminary step was taken to validate the Chinese version of the Psychological Stress Questionnaire and Views of Social and Academic Success among parents of deaf and hard-of-hearing children in mainland China.

Results indicated that psychological stress due to COVID-19 significantly negatively predicted parents’ views of school success, supporting this study’s hypothesis. It should be noted that regression analysis yielded statistically significant results for only one dimension of parents’ psychological stress. While seemingly limited, these results are nonetheless statistically significant and likely to be meaningful data, rather than statistical anomalies, for three reasons.

First, there was no construct similarity between psychological stress due to COVID-19 and parents’ views of school success. The former includes three dimensions: (a) risk awareness, which reflects the subject’s self-evaluated risk stoicism regarding their environment; (b) physical and mental responses, which reveal the subject’s stress response to their current environment; and (c) optimistic hope, which mirrors how confident the subjects were about defeating the epidemic and their optimism regarding the current outbreak. The latter (parents’ views of school success) consists of two dimensions: (a) academic success assesses how important it was to parents that their children be academically successful; and (b) social success assesses how important it was to parents that their children be socially successful.

Second, parents with higher levels of psychological stress due to COVID-19 scored lower on their views of school success. During COVID-19, parents across mainland China, including those of deaf or hard-of-hearing children, were forced to do more homeschooling. In addition, parents of deaf or hard-of-hearing children were also required to do home interventions. All these challenges may exacerbate the behavioral and emotional problems of deaf or hard-of-hearing children, which may frustrate their parents and make them devalue their children’s school success. Therefore, it is reasonable to find a negative relationship between parents’ psychological stress due to COVID-19 and their views of school success. However, these interpretations do not indicate a causal relationship between the two constructs. It is equally likely that, during COVID-19, parents’ lower scores on views of school success would lead them to have higher levels of psychological stress due to COVID-19. Third, the present research found parental stress was related to negative parenting, in line with previous studies (e.g., Shawler & Sullivan, 2017; Ueda et al., 2020; Woolfson & Grant, 2006).

Researchers may also be interested in how unexpected findings might be interpreted. One unexpected finding was parents’ physical and mental responses significantly positively predicted their views of their children’s school success. One explanation may be that parents’ physical and mental responses may require them to emphasize their children’s school success; another may concern the study’s uneven gender distribution. As Najmi et al.’s (2018) study indicated that mothers tended to have higher levels of parental stress than fathers, and 68.5% of the investigated parents were mothers, it is not surprising that parents’ physical and mental responses significantly positively predicted their views of their children’s school success.

The above explanations are only post hoc speculations. If future research yields similar findings, researchers are urged to explore further by conducting follow-up interviews.

Significance, Limitations, and Implications

This study makes three significant contributions to the existing research. First, it pioneers investigating the impact of COVID-19 on parenting D/HH children in the context of mainland China, which has a large number of D/HH children and has been greatly affected by COVID-19. Second, it explores stress in parents of deaf and hard-of-hearing children under COVID-19, which greatly expands the research domain of parental stress. Third, results regarding the psychometric properties of the two inventories have enriched the data banks for the Psychological Stress Questionnaire and Views of School Success. It is worth noting this is the first study to have validated Views of School Success among parents of deaf and hard-of-hearing children in the Chinese context using CFA.

However, the present research has five major limitations. First, it is a correlational study; a longitudinal exploration of the effects of the COVID-19 quarantine on parents of deaf and hard-of-hearing children would further our understanding of the phenomenon. Second, we collected parents’ self-reported data; although widely used, this data collection method may be less objective than behavioral measures. Third, the male/female distribution of parents was uneven. Fourth, for various reasons, information was not gathered regarding the severity of the children’s disabilities, which may have influenced the present study’s results. Fifth, only three D/HH university students were included in the present research.

These limitations indicate the findings reported herein should be considered preliminary rather than definitive. However, as there are good reasons to believe the data are meaningful, some implications may be proposed for future pandemics in closely related areas such as mental health and education in families of children with developmental disabilities.

First, given that parents’ psychological stress due to COVID-19 was above average levels and parents’ mental health greatly affects children’s developmental outcomes and parenting, governments should emphasize parents’ mental health during COVID-19 or future pandemics and take immediate and effective measures to enhance it. For instance, governments may provide guidelines on how to access existing public and private health and social welfare services; they may also quickly develop mental health interventions for parents to address worries, distress, dysfunctional coping strategies, and negative parental behaviors.

The second implication concerns education for deaf and hard-of-hearing children during COVID-19 and future pandemics. As homeschooling and, especially, home therapy are major detrimental factors in parental stress (Fontanesi et al., 2020; Narzisi, 2020), public health and special schools should provide parents with knowledge about, for example, how deaf and hard-of-hearing children express distress at different ages and the importance of sharing and talking about fears and negative emotions (Dalton et al., 2020). In this way, parents may still be able to educate their children in appropriate ways, even when under stress (Belsky, 1984).

Third, as parents who scored higher on psychological stress due to COVID-19 also scored lower on their views of school success, efforts can be made to improve parents’ views of school success by reducing their psychological stress due to COVID-19 or future pandemics. For instance, university/school therapists may provide weekly online consultations, or special teachers may be arranged to contact parents online or by phone. Parents may also share participation in their children’s video games or internet sessions with other parents.

Footnotes

Note

RMB refers to the renminbi, the official currency of China.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

This manuscript was supported by Qilu Young Scholars Discipline Construction Fund of Shandong University [No.11090082163149].

Ethical Approval

All procedures in the study involving human participants were done in accordance with the ethical standards of the institution and national research committee, the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments, or comparable ethical standards.

Informed Consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants in the study.

ORCID iDs

Sanyin Cheng

Shengli Cheng

References

Belsky

(1984). The determinants of parenting: A process model. Child Development, 55(1), 83–96. https://doi.org/10.2307/1129836

Bentler

P. M.

Bonett

D. G.

(1980). Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychological Bulletin, 88, 588–606. http://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.88.3.588

Brooks

S. K.

Webster

R. K.

Smith

L. E.

Woodland

Wessely

Greenberg

Rubin

G. J.

(2020). The psychological impact of quarantine and how to reduce it: Rapid review of the evidence. The Lancet, 395(10227), 912–920. http://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30460-8

Brown

S. M.

Doom

J. R.

Lechuga-Peña

Watamura

S. E.

Koppels

(2020). Stress and parenting during the global COVID-19 pandemic. Child Abuse & Neglect, 110(Part 2). http://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2020.104699

Browne

M. W.

Cudeck

(1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In Bollen

K. A.

Long

J. S.

(Eds.), Testing structural equation models (pp. 136–162). SAGE.

Bush

H. H.

Cohen

S. R.

Eisenhower

A. S.

Blacher

(2018). Parent’s expectations for young children with autism spectrum disorder. Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities, 52(4), 357–368. http://www.jstor.org/stable/26420410

Butterworth

Winsor

Smith

F. A.

Migliore

Domin

Timmons

Hall

A. C.

(2015). StateData: The national report on employment services and outcomes. Institute for Community Inclusion.

Byrne

B. M.

(1989). A primer of LISREL. Springer.

Chen

G. M.

D. H.

(1994). Parents’ views of education—A new concept worthy of attention. Family Education (Kindergarten Edition), 1, 47.

10.

Cohen

(1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112(1), 155–159. http://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.112.1.155

11.

Coyne

L. W.

Gould

E. R.

Grimaldi

Wilson

K. G.

Baffuto

Biglan

(2020). First things first: Parent psychological flexibility and self-compassion during COVID-19. Behavior Analysis in Practice. http://doi.org/10.1007/s40617-020-00435-w

12.

Dalton

Rapa

Stein

(2020). Protecting the psychological health of children through effective communication about COVID-19. The Lancet Child & Adolescent Health, 4, 346–347. http://doi:10.1016/S2352-4642(20)30097-3

13.

Dirks

Uilenburg

Rieffe

(2016). Parental stress among parents of toddlers with moderate hearing loss. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 55, 27–36. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2016.03.008

14.

Fong

Wilgosh

Sobsey

(1993). The experience of parenting an adolescent with autism. International Journal of Disability, Development, and Education, 40(2), 105–113. http://doi.org/10.1080/0156655930400204

15.

Fontanesi

Marchetti

Mazza

Di Giandomenico

Roma

Verrocchio

M. C.

(2020). The effect of the COVID-19 lockdown on parents: A call to adopt urgent measures. Psychological Trauma: Theory, Research, Practice, and Policy, 12(Suppl. 1), S79–S81. http://doi.org/10.1037/tra0000672

16.

Frontini

Moreira

Canavarro

M. C.

(2016). Parenting stress and quality of life in pediatric obesity: The mediating role of parenting styles. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 25(3), 1011–1023. http://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-015-0279-3

17.

Gray

D. E.

(2002). Ten years on: A longitudinal study of families of children with autism. Journal of Intellectual and Developmental Disability, 27(3), 215–222. http://doi.org/10.1080/1366825021000008639

18.

Hintermair

(2006). Parental resources, parental stress, and socioemotional development of deaf and hard-of-hearing children. The Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 11(4), 493–513. http://doi.org/10.1093/deafed/enl005

19.

Hofstede

(1997.). Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind. McGraw Hill.

20.

L.-T.

Bentler

P. M.

(1999). Cut-off criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 155. http://doi:10.1080/10705519909540118

21.

Ivey

J. K.

(2004). What do parents expect? Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 19(1), 27–33. https://doi.org/10.1177/10883576040190010401

22.

Jiao

W. Y.

Wang

L. N.

Liu

Fang

S. F.

Jiao

F. Y.

Pettoello-Mantovani

Somekh

(2020). Behavioral and emotional disorders in children during the COVID-19 epidemic. The Journal of Pediatrics, 221, 264–266.e1. http://doi:10.1016/j.jpeds.2020.03.013

23.

Kirby

A. V.

(2016). Parent expectations mediate outcomes for young adults with autism spectrum disorder. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 46(5), 1643–1655. http://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-015-2691-3

24.

Levinger

Alhuzail

N. A.

(2018). Bedouin hearing parents of children with hearing loss: Stress, coping, and quality of life. American Annals of the Deaf, 163(3), 328–355. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26484301

25.

B. Z.

Guan

(1995). A survey on views of education among parents of preschool children in Tianjin. Preschool Education Research, 3, 18–20.

26.

D. S.

Wang

F. S.

Wang

(2002). Experimental exploration to promote the transformation of parents’ views of education. Educational Research, 4, 67–73.

27.

H. Z.

(1999). A survey report on the status quo of parents’ views of education in primary and secondary schools and kindergartens in Shanghai. Shanghai Educational Research, 2, 3–5.

28.

Lima

C. K. T.

de Medeiros Carvalho

P. M.

Lima

I. D. A. S.

de Oliveira Nunes

J. V. A.

Saraiva

J. S.

de Souza

R. I.

da Silva

C. G. L.

Neto

M. L. R.

(2020). The emotional impact of Coronavirus 2019-nCoV (new Coronavirus disease). Psychiatry Research, 112915. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2020.112915

29.

Liu

Q. L.

Wang

K. M.

Zhou

L. L.

Han

(2021). The learning needs of parents of children with mild mental retardation and its influencing factors. Chinese Journal of Special Education, 254, 838–843.

30.

Mazzotti

V. L.

Rowe

D. A.

Sinclair

Poppen

Woods

W. E.

Shearer

M. L.

(2016). Predictors of post-school success: A systematic review of NLTS2 secondary analyses. Career Development and Transition for Exceptional Individuals, 39(4), 196–215. http://doi:10.1177/2165143415588047

31.

Najmi

Heidari

Feizi

Hovsepian

Momeni

Azhar

S. M. M.

(2018). Do psychological characteristics of mothers predict parenting stress? A cross-sectional study among mothers of children with different disabilities. Archives of Psychiatric Nursing, 32(3), 396–402. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.apnu.2017.12.004

32.

Narzisi

(2020). Handle the autism spectrum condition during Coronavirus (COVID-19) stay at home period: Ten tips for helping parents and caregivers of young children. Brain Sciences, 10, 207. http://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci10040207

33.

Pillai

K. C. S.

(1960). Statistical tables for tests of multivariate hypotheses. Statistical Center, University of the Philippines.

34.

Poon

K. K.

(2013). Parental expectations regarding postschool social attainments of adolescents with autism spectrum disorders in Singapore. American Journal on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, 118(2), 95–107. https://doi.org/10.1352/1944-7558-118.2.95

35.

Quittner

A. L.

Barker

D. H.

Cruz

Snell

Grimley

M. E.

Botteri

, & CDaCI Investigative Team. (2010). Parenting stress among parents of deaf and hearing children: Associations with language delays and behavior problems. Parenting: Science and Practice, 10(2), 136–155. http://doi.org/10.1080/15295190903212851

36.

Ryan

C. S.

Casas

J. F.

Kelly-Vance

Ryalls

B. O.

Nero

(2010). Parent involvement and views of school success: The role of parents’ Latino and White American cultural orientations. Psychology in the Schools, 47(4). 391–405. http://doi.org/10.1002/pits.20477

37.

Shawler

P. M.

Sullivan

M. A.

(2017). Parental stress, discipline strategies, and child behavior problems in families with young children with autism spectrum disorders. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 32(2), 142–151. http://doi.org/10.1177/1088357615610114

38.

Spinelli

Lionetti

Pastore

Fasolo

(2020). Parents’ stress and children’s psychological problems in families facing the COVID-19 outbreak in Italy. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 1713. http://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01713

39.

Ueda

M. M.

Ding

Blumberg

Zhang

Lantier

(2020). Maternal parenting style in relation to parenting stress and behavioral outcomes in Japanese children with and without autism. Journal of Developmental and Physical Disabilities, 32(6), 983–1006. http://doi.org/10.1007/s10882-020-09727-z

40.

Wagner

Newman

Cameto

Garza

Levine

(2005). After high school: A first look at the postschool experiences of youth with disabilities [A report from the National Longitudinal Transition Study-2]. SRI International. www.nlts2.org/reports/2005_04/nlts2_report_2005_04_complete.pdf

41.

Wang

Cheng

Y. Q.

Zhou

Jiang

Guo

Junhui Chen

Wan

(2020). Psychological status of Wuhan medical staff in fighting against COVID-19. Medical Journal of Wuhan University, 41(4), 547–550.

42.

Wang

M. T.

Degol

J. L.

Amemiya

Parr

Guo

(2020). Classroom climate and children’s academic and psychological well-being: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Developmental Review, 57, 100912. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.dr.2020.100912

43.

Woolfson

Grant

(2006). Authoritative parenting and parental stress in parents of pre-school and older children with developmental disabilities. Child: Care, Health and Development, 32(2), 177–184. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2214.2006.00603.x

44.

Yao

Zhang

Guo

Fan

Chen

(2020). Mental health status of students’ parents during COVID-19 pandemic and its influence factors. General Psychiatry, 33(4), Article e100250. http://doi:10.1136/gpsych-2020-100250

45.

G. L.

Xin

(1995). Research on parents’ views of education from the perspective of social cognition. Journal of East China Normal University (Educational Science Edition), 3, 87–93.

46.

Zhang

H. C.

Liu

(2006). The learning needs of parents of children with mild mental retardation and its influencing factors. Chinese Journal of Special Education, 69(3), 3–8.

Item	Academic success Estimate	Social success Estimate
1		.64
2	.47
3	.35
4	.53
5		.74
6		.62
7	.78
8		.69
9		.69
10	.69
11	.64
12		.84
13		.68
14		.85
15	.78
16	.89
17	.84
18	.71

Item	Academic success Estimate	Social success Estimate
1		.64
2	.47
3	.35
4	.53
5		.74
6		.62
7	.78
8		.69
9		.69
10	.69
11	.64
12		.84
13		.68
14		.85
15	.78
16	.89
17	.84
18	.71

Item	Academic success Estimate	Social success Estimate
1		.64
2	.47
3	.35
4	.53
5		.74
6		.62
7	.78
8		.69
9		.69
10	.69
11	.64
12		.84
13		.68
14		.85
15	.78
16	.89
17	.84
18	.71