Resilience Factors Mitigating the Effects of Recurrent Family Conflict on Health Outcomes: Findings from a Territory-Wide Family Survey in Hong Kong

Resilience Factors Mitigating the Effects of Recurrent Family Conflict on Health Outcomes: Findings from a Territory-Wide Family Survey in Hong Kong | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article Resilience Factors Mitigating the Effects of Recurrent Family Conflict on Health Outcomes: Findings from a Territory-Wide Family Survey in Hong Kong Shaolingyun Guo, Qiqi Chen, Ko Ling Chan This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-7354207/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract Chronic exposure to multiple family conflicts has been linked to a range of adverse physical and psychological health conditions, including weakened physical health and increased risk for depression. This research sought to identify protective factors, including adaptive coping strategies, healthy family functioning, and strong social support, that promote resilience and contribute to health and well-being in the context of family conflict. Utilizing data from the Hong Kong Family Survey (N = 817), this study investigates resilience factors that mitigate the impact of family conflict on adverse health outcomes, including poor physical health and depressive symptoms, through the application of structural equation modeling. The results indicated that 18.36% of respondents reported experiencing singular conflict with one family member, while 11.63% reported multiple conflicts involving two or more family members. The results of the structural equation modeling revealed that coping strategies, including direct communication and help-seeking, function as protective factors in the association between family conflict and poor health conditions. Poor family functioning resulting from family conflict exacerbates adverse health outcomes, whereas healthy family functioning has the opposite effect, mitigating these negative consequences. A negative association was found between family conflict and social support, suggesting potentially low engagement with social support services among Hong Kong families. The findings underscore that a combination of family-focused prevention, practical coping skill development, accessible support services, and culturally sensitive interventions collectively contributes to improved health outcomes by mitigating the adverse effects of repeated family conflicts. Family Conflict Resilience Coping Health Depression Figures Figure 1 Introduction The family environment is the context in which both adults and children form many of their most significant and close personal relationships, and their physical and psychological well-being depends on the quality of these interpersonal relationships and communication (Koerner & Fitzpatrick, 2006). Family conflict creates an environment that poses significant risks to the health and well-being of all family members, as it can undermine the quality of family relationships, disrupt healthy family functioning, and contribute to increased stress within the household (Cummings & Davies, 2010). Frequent and unresolved family conflicts place children, parents, and the overall well-being of the family at risk for a variety of problems. Conflicts between parents, as well as between parents and children, are major indicators of strained interparental and parent–child relationships and are associated with a range of health difficulties (e.g., Chhabra & Sodhi, 2012; Cummings & Schatz, 2012). A substantial body of research has shown that chronic and recurrent family conflicts can lead to mental health symptoms (e.g., depression; Koss et al., 2017) and general health problems (Santini et al., 2021). While many family conflicts are minor without lasting harm, unresolved or poorly managed conflicts can escalate, sometimes leading to family violence. Given the prevalence of family conflict and its potential to progress to violent incidents, this study aims to identify and understand protective mechanisms that mitigate the adverse health outcomes associated with multiple family conflicts. Such understanding is essential for fostering resilience to potential family violence and for designing effective interventions that enhance both family and individual well-being. The occurrence of multiple conflicts within a family may serve as an indicator of conflict acceleration, wherein the frequency, intensity, and severity of family disputes increase the risk of family violence (Anderson, 2010). Family conflict seldom occurs as a single, isolated incident; instead, it typically emerges as a sequence of related disagreements that may intensify progressively (Margolin & Christensen, 1996). The accumulation and escalation of these repeated family disputes can create a persistently stressful family environment, which has been linked to both psychological and physical health problems (Johnston & Campbell, 1999; Kitzmann, 2000). To examine the impact of recurrent family conflicts on various health outcomes, we adopt a family systems perspective (Bowen, 1978), by focusing on the interactions and processes within the family unit rather than analyzing individual family members in isolation. This approach evaluates dimensions such as family communication, interaction patterns, and adaptive coping strategies to stress to gain insight into overall family relationships. Previous studies have identified the associations between poor family functioning and the degree of conflict present within a family unit, including the frequency of openly expressed anger and interpersonal disputes among family members (Yi et al., 2025). Consequently, family dysfunction resulting from higher levels of general family conflict is associated with both physical health problems (Cohen, 2004) and mental health issues (Oltean et al., 2020). The way individuals handle multiple family conflicts can play a crucial role in preventing the development of negative health and psychological outcomes (DeCarlo Santiago & Wadsworth, 2008). However, not all families exposed to conflict inevitably experience adverse health outcomes and psychological symptoms, as some individuals exhibit resilience by successfully adapting to difficult familial situations (Walsh, 2016). Resilience, in the context of family systems, refers to the capacity of families to withstand and rebound from disruptive family circumstances, including conflict, while maintaining or even strengthening family functioning (Saltzman et al., 2011; Walsh, 2016). Research has identified several protective mechanisms that promote resilience in families experiencing conflict, including positive family communication patterns (Koerner & Fitzpatrick, 2006), the presence of external support systems (Folkman & Moskowitz, 2000), and effective coping strategies (Lee & Liu, 2001). Empirical evidence suggests that resilience correlates with lower levels of depression and anxiety (Fosco & Grych, 2013), as well as improved physical health among adults and children exposed to family conflict (El-Sheikh & Erath, 2011). Although conflict has the potential to undermine family unity and individual health, the way in which families communicate amidst ongoing and multiple conflicts is a pivotal factor influencing the resulting outcomes. Direct communication is fundamental to building family resilience in the face of conflict, as it enables family members to work together in problem-solving, reach mutual agreement, and minimize internal disputes (Walsh, 2016). Empirical studies have demonstrated that direct communication is associated with reduced depression (Bakhtiari et al., 2024), greater satisfaction within family relationships (Sillars & Canary, 2013), and improved overall well-being (Robertson et al., 2001). Furthermore, direct communication reduces the likelihood of escalation of ongoing family conflict, as well as the risk of severe violence (Gottman & Notarius, 2000). However, there remains a significant lack of research investigating the possible cultural constraints and contextual variables that may affect the efficacy of direct communication as a coping mechanism for family conflict. Most of the existing research has concentrated on Western, individualistic societies that prioritize direct communication, while comparatively little attention has been paid to collectivist cultures or families (Gudykunst et al., 2010). Therefore, developing a more nuanced perspective that considers the situational and cultural variations in communication pattern is essential for achieving a more comprehensive understanding of resilience within the context of family conflict in contemporary East Asian societies. Furthermore, the effectiveness and expression of social support as a resilience factor can buffer individuals and families against the stress associated with ongoing family conflicts (Masten & Monn, 2015). The protective role of social support is operated by various sources, including emotional, informational, and instrumental assistance, which collectively strengthen an individual’s capacity to manage family conflict (Wang et al., 2011). Despite the benefits of social support, previous research has found that families in Hong Kong may face several limitations in accessing and utilizing social support. Firstly, the accessibility of social support is influenced by the presence of shame associated with disclosing family issues (Guo et al., 2025), as well as by internalized negative perceptions related to revealing minority status (Mak & Cheung, 2010). Secondly, perceptions of stigma related to obtaining assistance beyond the family context may affect individuals’ willingness to access social support services (Taylor et al., 2004). In the social context of Hong Kong, social support is most effective when it complements, rather than supplants, other coping strategies such as direct communication and help-seeking both within and outside of families. Previous empirical evidence indicates that individuals from Asian cultural backgrounds often rely on extended family relationships and seek help from individuals outside the nuclear family unit to manage conflicts (Yeh & Wang, 2010). These external social networks can connect family members to non-professional resources, which are crucial for resolving family conflict (Walsh, 2006). Furthermore, the collectivist values, prioritization of family harmony, and strong sense of filial piety characteristic of Chinese cultures can influence how families in Hong Kong interpret and respond to family conflict (Tjosvold et al., 2000). Accordingly, informal help-seeking functions as an important mechanism for enhancing family resilience by facilitating individuals’ ability to manage challenging family dynamics to promote health and well-being (Abe-Kim et al., 2002). In Hong Kong, where rapid urbanization, high population density, and intense competitive work pressures contribute to family stress, the ability to seek support from various sources becomes increasingly effective. Given the social context of Hong Kong, informal help-seeking from family members or external sources constitutes a vital aspect of resilience and serves as a complementary approach to formal social support services. These social-contextual observations underscore the need for further research into how the integration of informal and formal support systems, especially when culturally adapted, can enhance family resilience and mitigate adverse health outcomes. Although extensive research has explored the impact of specific forms of family conflict, such as marital discord, parent-child disputes and sibling rivalry, on health correlates, comparatively little attention has been drawn to explore the cumulative or interactive effects that arise when multiple family conflicts are experienced concurrently. Moreover, the mechanisms by which exposure to multiple, overlapping family conflicts influences resilience and health outcomes remain underexplored. While existing research has identified various individual resilience factors that may buffer the adverse effects of family conflict, there is a limited understanding of how multiple resilience factors interact and collectively influence health-related outcomes. Addressing these gaps would provide a more nuanced understanding of recurrent family conflicts and inform the development of culturally targeted interventions to support families among Hong Kong families. Drawing on a representative sample from Hong Kong’s Family Surveys, the present study extends this line of research by investigating: (1) the association between multiple family conflicts and health outcomes (i.e., physical health and depression), (2) the role of potential resilience factors that may buffer against poor physical health and depressive symptoms, and (3) combined effects of multiple protective mechanisms within the social context of Hong Kong. Methods Study Design and Procedure The study utilized data from the Family Survey conducted by the Family Council of the Home Affairs Bureau of the Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region. These surveys have been commissioned on a biannual basis since 2011 to provide updated information on changes and developments among Hong Kong families. The research team conducted fieldwork for the fifth wave of the Family Survey – Thematic Survey from November 2021 to May 2022. Based on the Hong Kong Census and Statistics Department Frame of Quarters, the surveys employed a two-stage stratified sampling design within 3,500 living quarters. The survey sampled all persons regardless of gender, sexual orientation, religion, geography, disability, language, or culture. In the first stage, a list of quarters was randomly sampled by geographical area. In the second stage, a household member (excluding foreign domestic helpers) aged 15 or above was randomly selected using the last birthday method. The average response rate for the surveys was 63.5%. The current study included a sub-sample consisting of 817 respondents. Ethics approval for this study was granted by the Human Subjects Ethics Committee of the authors’ affiliated university. Measures Demographics Participants were asked to provide their demographic information, including household size, marital status, age, gender, education level, employment status, and socio-economic status (SES) factors. Marital status was coded as 0 = “ Married or cohabiting with a partner ” or 1 = “ Not married or separated or divorced or widowed .” Education level was coded on a 3-point scale (0 = “ Primary or lower education; ” 2 = “ Secondary education; ” 3 = “ Post-secondary education or above ”). Employment status was coded as 0 = “ Employed ” or 1 = “ Unemployed .” We referred to the classification by the Census and Statistics Department of Hong Kong (calculated by family total monthly income per household member) and categorized the family monthly income into two groups (1 = “ below median family monthly income of Hong Kong ;” 2 = “ above median family monthly income of Hong Kong ”). Respondents were asked to report their price-to-rent ratio or percentage of mortgage covered by their monthly income for the ratio of rent or mortgage to family income, which was coded as 1 = “ Under 20% ,” 2 = “ 20%-49% ,” 3 = “ 50% or above. ” The average living space per person was calculated by the median per capita floor area of accommodation in Hong Kong ( Hong Kong 2021 Population Census - Thematic Report: Persons Living in Subdivided Units , n.d.), which was coded as 1 = “ Below median ,” 2 = “ above median. ” Depressive Symptoms Depressive Symptoms were assessed as the outcome variable using the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9; Kroenke et al., 1999 ). PHQ-9 is a 9-item, self-administered screening tool for assessment of the severity of depressive symptoms. The questionnaires measure how often the respondents had been disturbed by any of the 9 items during the immediately preceding 2 weeks. Sample questions include: “ feeling down, depressed, or hopeless ,” “ feeling tired or having little energy ,” and “ poor appetite or overeating. ” Participants’ responses were scored on a scale of 0 to 3 (0 = “ not at all; ” 1 = “ several days; ” 2 = “ more than a week; ” 3 = “ nearly every day ”). An overall score was computed by taking the mean score of all 9 items; a higher score indicated more severe depressive symptoms. The Cronbach reliability statistics for this scale were satisfactory ( α = 0.91). Physical Health Participants were asked to rate their physical health using the Self-Rated Health (SRH) measure (Idler & Benyamini, 1997 ), which provides a subjective evaluation of an individual’s health status. This was operationalized as a five-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (excellent) to 5 (poor). A higher score indicated the participant’s perceptions of bad physical health. Family Conflict Frequency Participants were asked to report the frequency of family conflict over the past two years using a 3-point Likert scale (0 = none , 1 = singular conflict: conflict with one family members , 2 = multiple conflicts: conflicts with two or more family members ). Family Functioning Family functioning was assessed as the outcome variable using the Chinese Family Assessment Instrument (CFAI; Shek & Ma, 2009 ). CFAI is a 33-item, validated measurement of perceived family functioning in five subscales. Sample questions include: “ family members care each other” (mutuality); “ family members talk to each other (communication); “ lack of harmony among family members ” (harmony and discord); “ parents take care of their children ” (parental concern); and “ parents force children to do things ” (parental control). Respondents were asked to indicate their level of agreement with each item on a five-point Likert scale, ranging from 1 ( very much fits our family ) to 5 ( does not fit our family ). Reverse coding was applied to some items, and an overall family functioning score was computed by taking the mean score of all 33 items; a higher score indicated worse family functioning. The Cronbach reliability statistics for each subscale were satisfactory (all α > 0.7). Perceived Social Support Perceived social support was assessed using the Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support (MSPSS; Zimet et al., 1998), a brief instrument developed to evaluate individuals’ perceptions of support received from three distinct sources: family, friends, and a significant other. The sample items include: “ My family really tries to help me ” (family); “ I can count on my friends when things go wrong ” (friend); and “ There is a special person in my life who cares about my feelings ” (significant other). The level of social support was rated on a seven-point Likert scale (ranging from 1 = not very supportive to 7 = very supportive). A higher score indicated greater social support from family members, important others, and friends. The Cronbach reliability statistics for this scale were satisfactory ( α = 0.95). Direct Communication The coping tactic of direct communication was evaluated dichotomously. Respondents were asked to report whether they had used direct communication with the conflict family member(s) as the coping tactic (1 = present and, 0 = absent ). Help-seeking The coping tactic of help-seeking was evaluated dichotomously. Respondents were asked to report whether they had sought help from community, family, online resources, professional staff, public services, and social services, respectively (1 = present and, 0 = absent ). Statistical Analyses Demographic, socioeconomic, and family factors were summarized in descriptive statistics. Between-group comparisons were conducted to examine the gender differences and the frequency of family conflicts by t tests/chi-square and ANOVA tests. Structural equation modelling (SEM) was applied to specify the structure between observed indicators and latent construct through a path diagram. The SEM approach allows for simultaneous testing of a model that consists of multiple separate hypothetical relationships (Hair, 2010 ). Standardized regression coefficients were computed for paths between variables. Multiple indices were used to assess the model fit while testing both the measurement and structural models, including chi-square to df ratio or χ 2 /df, the comparative fit index (CFI; Bentler, 1990 ), Tucker–Lewis index (TLI; Tucker & Lewis, 1973 ), root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA; Steiger, 1990 ) and standardized root mean square residual (SRMR; Jöreskog & Sörbom, 1993 ). The data for SEM were analyzed using R software version 4.2.3 and the lavaan package (Rosseel, 2012 ). The statistical significance level was set at .05. Results Demographic Characteristics of the Participants Table 1 shows the demographic characteristics of the respondents by gender. The total sample comprised 817 participants that completed the survey, of whom 150 (18.36%) reported having conflict with one family member and 95 (11.63%) reported having conflict with two or more family members. No significant differences were found between genders in the frequency of family conflict. Gender differences were observed in household size ( t = -2.492, p = 0.013). The respondents’ mean age was 48.64 ( SD = 15.26), with a significant gender difference ( t = 3.495, p < 0.001). A total 92.90% of the overall sample were married or cohabitating with a partner. Regarding employment status by gender, 7.44% of fathers and 5.39% of mothers were unemployed. Table 1 Demographic Characteristics of the Participants Total ( N = 817) Male Respondents ( n = 390) Female Respondents ( n = 427) Chi-Square or t -Statistic df p -value Household size ( Mean, SD ) 2.16 (1.00) 2.07 (1.01) 2.24 (0.98) -2.492 803 0.013 Gender Male 390 (47.74%) Female 427 (52.26%) Age ( Mean, SD ) 48.64 (15.26) 50.58 (15.58) 46.86 (14.76) 3.495 798 < 0.001 Marital status Married or cohabiting with a partner 759 (92.90%) 376 (96.41%) 383 (89.70%) -3.839 715 < 0.001 Separated/divorced/widowed 58 (7.10%) 14 (3.59%) 44 (10.30%) Educational attainment Primary education or lower 169 (20.69%) 82 (21.02%) 87 (20.37%) -0.317 808 0.751 Secondary education 321 (39.29%) 154 (39.49%) 167 (39.11%) Post-secondary education 327 (40.02%) 154 (39.49%) 173 (40.52%) Socioeconomic Status (SES) Unemployment 52 (6.37%) 29 (7.44%) 23 (5.39%) 5.590 389 < 0.001 Family monthly income (in HKD) Below median family monthly income 448 (54.83%) 212 (54.36%) 236 (55.27%) 0.261 809 0.794 Above median family monthly income 369 (45.17%) 178 (45.64%) 191 (44.73%) Ratio of rent or mortgage/Family income ( Mean, SD ) Under 30% 727 (88.98%) 351 (88.20%) 376 (88.06%) -0.87 815 0.383 30% − 49% 41 (5.02%) 18 (4.22%) 23 (5.39%) 50% or above 49 (6.00%) 21 (7.58%) 28 (6.55%) Per capita living space/average living space per person ( Mean, SD ) Below median 616 (75.40%) 288 (73.85%) 328 (76.82%) 0.982 801 0.327 Above median 201 (24.60%) 102 (26.15%) 99 (23.18%) Family functioning 1.94 (0.57) 1.94 (0.56) 1.96 (0.58) -0.589 813 0.556 Family conflict Multiple conflicts with 2 or more family members 95 (11.63%) 45 (11.54%) 50 (11.71%) -1.352 810 0.177 Singular conflict with 1 family member 150 (18.36%) 59 (15.13%) 91 (21.31%) No conflict with anyone 572 (70.01%) 286 (73.33%) 286 (66.98%) Coping strategy for resilience Direct communication with the conflict member 127 (15.55%) 58 (14.87%) 69 (16.16%) -0.508 812 0.612 Help-seeking 65 (7.96%) 33 (8.46%) 32 (7.49%) 0.509 798 0.611 Perceived social support ( Mean, SD ) 5.23 (1.02) 5.16 (1.00) 5.29 (1.03) -1.776 812 0.080 Outcomes Physical health ( Mean, SD ) 3.10 (0.97) 3.10 (0.99) 3.11 (0.95) -0.258 802 0.797 Depressive symptoms ( Mean, SD ) 0.36 (0.48) 0.34 (0.49) 0.39 (0.48) -1.452 806 0.147 Variation in Individual Characteristics by Frequency of Family Conflicts Table 2 shows the demographic characteristics of the respondents by the frequency of family conflict. No significant differences were found for household size, age, gender, or marital status. The t-test revealed significant differences in education levels ( t = 5.321, p = 0.021), indicating that respondents with secondary education or higher reported a greater frequency of family conflict. Households with below-average living space reported a higher frequency of family conflict ( t = 4.334, p = 0.038). Differences were also observed in coping strategies across various frequencies of family conflict. Among individuals who used direct communication as a coping tactic, 75 (50.00%) reported experiencing a single conflict with one family member, while 52 (54.74%) reported experiencing multiple conflicts with two or more family members. Approximately 65.0% of individuals who reported family conflicts involving two or more family members sought help from various sources, whereas only 2.0% of those who reported conflict with a single family member considered help-seeking as a coping tactic. Respondents who reported multiple family conflicts tended to experience worse depressive symptoms ( t = 25.370, p < 0.001). Table 2 Descriptive Statistics by Family Conflict No conflict (n = 572) Singular conflict (n = 150) Multiple conflicts (n = 95) One-way ANOVA F -statistics or t -test df p -value Household size ( Mean, SD ) 2.15 (1.02) 2.17 (0.94) 2.19 (1.01) 0.137 815 0.711 Gender Male 286 (50%) 59 (39.33%) 45 (47.37%) 1.825 815 0.177 Female 286 (50%) 91 (60.67%) 50 (52.63%) Age ( Mean, SD ) 49.25 (15.64) 46.81 (14.92) 47.85 (13.25) 1.978 815 0.160 Marital status Married or cohabiting with a partner 533 (93.18%) 134 (89.33%) 92 (96.84%) 0.178 815 0.673 Separated/divorced/widowed 39 (6.82%) 16 (10.67%) 3 (3.16%) Educational attainment Primary education or lower 127 (22.20%) 31 (20.67%) 11 (11.58%) 5.321 815 0.021 Secondary education 226 (39.51%) 56 (37.33%) 39 (41.05%) Post-secondary education 219 (38.29%) 63 (42.00%) 45 (47.37%) Socioeconomic Status (SES) Unemployment 35 (6.12%) 15 (10.00%) 2 (2.11%) 0.300 815 0.584 Family monthly income (in HKD) Below median family monthly income 315 (55.07%) 85 (56.67%) 48 (50.53%) 0.307 815 0.580 Above median family monthly income 257 (44.93%) 65 (43.33%) 47 (49.47%) Ratio of rent or mortgage/Family income ( Mean, SD ) Under 30% 507 (88.64%) 137 (91.33%) 83 (87.37%) 0.000 815 0.988 30% − 49% 30 (5.25%) 6 (4.00%) 5 (5.26%) 50% or above 35 (6.11%) 7 (4.67%) 7 (7.37%) Per capita living space/average living space per person ( Mean, SD ) Below median 421 (73.60%) 116 (73.33%) 76 (80.00%) 4.334 815 0.038 Above median 151 (26.40%) 34 (26.67%) 16 (20.00%) Family functioning 3.79 (0.00) 2.17 (0.53) 2.16 (0.65) 45.310 815 < 0.001 Coping tactic Direct communication with the conflict member 0 (0.00%) 75 (50.00%) 52 (54.74%) 503.500 815 < 0.001 Help-seeking 0 (0.00%) 3 (2.00%) 62 (65.26%) 614.300 815 < 0.001 Perceived social support ( Mean, SD ) 5.23 (0.96) 5.02 (1.29) 4.99 (1.14) 14.840 815 < 0.001 Outcomes Physical health ( Mean, SD ) 3.08 (0.97) 3.21 (1.04) 3.11 (0.87) 0.667 815 0.414 Depressive symptoms ( Mean, SD ) 0.31 (0.46) 0.47 (0.50) 0.53 (0.52) 25.370 815 < 0.001 Correlational Analysis Table 3 displays the correlations among direct communication, help-seeking, family functioning, perceived social support, and family conflict. As anticipated, family conflict and poor family functioning were positively correlated with each other. Significant associations were found between coping strategies and family conflict, such that the frequency of family conflict predicted the use of direct communication within the family unit and help-seeking from other sources. Poor family functioning was positively associated with both poor physical conditions and depressive symptoms. As expected, the higher level of perceived social support was significantly associated with better physical health and less depressive symptoms. Table 3 Correlations Among Coping Tactics, Family Functioning, Perceived Social Support and Family Conflict Family Conflict Help-seeking Direct Communication Family Functioning Perceived Social Support Physical Health Depressive Symptoms Family Conflict - Help-seeking 0.66*** - Direct Communication 0.74*** 0.35*** - Family Functioning 0.23*** -0.09** 0.12** - Perceived Social Support -0.13** -0.03 -0.05 -0.53*** - Physical Health 0.03 -0.02 -0.03 0.09* -0.20*** - Depressive Symptoms 0.17*** 0.06 0.10** 0.34*** -0.41*** 0.19*** - Mean 0.42 0.08 0.21 4.05 5.22 3.10 0.36 SD 0.69 0.27 0.41 0.57 1.02 0.97 0.48 Structural Equation Modeling Figures 1 presents the results from SEM that tested the mediated model in which both coping strategies (e.g., direct communication and help seeking), family functioning, perceived social support, and health conditions (e.g., physical health and depressive symptoms) are represented. Model fit indices indicated satisfactory fit ( χ 2 /df = 6.312, RMSEA = 0.081, CFI = 0.963, TLI = 0.922, and SRMR = 0.050). Family conflict was positively associated with poorer family functioning ( β = 0.23, p < 0.001), which in turn was linked to worse health conditions ( β = 0.17, p < 0.01). Family conflict was also associated with lower perceived social support ( β = -0.14, p < 0.01), while greater social support predicted better health outcomes ( β = -0.52, p < 0.001). Higher family conflict was related to increased use of direct communication ( β = 0.62, p < 0.001) and help-seeking ( β = 0.60, p < 0.001), both of which were associated with better health conditions ( β = -0.15, p < 0.01; β = -0.13, p < 0.01, respectively). Figure. 1 Structural model of family conflict, coping strategies, social support, family functioning and health condition The bootstrapping approach was used to generate 95% CIs (1,000 iterations) to confirm the significance of the indirect relationships in addition to the above direct effects. The mediation effect was significant if the confidence interval did not contain zero. As shown in Table 4 , the all indirect paths including family conflict on poor health conditions through the perceived social support ( βindirect = 0.027, 95% CI = [0.010, 0.049], p = 0.017), family conflict on poor health conditions through poor family functioning ( βindirect = 0.016, 95% CI = [0.004, 0.029], p = 0.006), and family conflict on poor health conditions through help-seeking ( βindirect = -0.030, CI = [-0.070, -0.002], p = 0.047) and direct communication ( βindirect = -0.038, 95% CI = [-0.079, − 0.003], p = 0.041) were significant. The results indicated that all mediators played partial mediation roles. Table 4 Indirect Effects with Estimated Bootstrap CIs Indirect Paths Estimated Effect 95% CI p -value Family Conflict → Perceived Social Support → Poor Health Conditions 0.027 [0.010, 0.049] 0.017 Family Conflict → Poor Family Functioning → Poor Health Conditions 0.016 [0.004, 0.029] 0.006 Family Conflict → Help Seeking → Poor Health Conditions -0.030 [-0.070, -0.002] 0.047 Family Conflict → Direct Communication → Poor Health Conditions -0.038 [-0.079, − 0.003] 0.041 Discussion The current study aims to investigate the resilience mechanisms through which exposure to multiple family conflicts affects general health and depressive symptoms among Chinese families in Hong Kong. Furthermore, this study systematically examines how multiple protective factors, including family functioning, social support, and adaptive coping strategies, interact to influence responses to family conflict. In line with prior research, our findings demonstrate that the multiple occurrences of unresolved family conflicts are linked to poor physical health and increased depressive symptoms, while emphasizing the existence of resilience processes that can mitigate these adverse effects. The results highlight the multifaceted nature of resilience against family conflict, which operates across various levels of the family system, including direct communication within the family unit, both intra-familial and extra-familial help-seeking, and engagement with external support networks. Consequently, robust family functioning and effective coping strategies facilitate constructive conflict resolution and mitigate adverse health and psychological outcomes. These findings contribute to a more comprehensive understanding of family conflict and offer valuable insights for the development of targeted interventions to assist families contending with persistent challenges. Our findings showed that multiple and unresolved family conflicts have been consistently linked to a range of adverse health outcomes. In line with previous research, chronic exposure to familial disputes can create a stressful family environment that undermines both psychological and physical well-being (Repetti et al., 2002 ). Furthermore, unresolved conflict can erode family functioning, leading to feelings of isolation and exacerbating depressive symptoms (Bokharey et al., 2021 ). Despite a growing body of literature examining family conflict and its impact on individual and family health and well-being, most existing research has focused on isolated or singular forms of conflict, such as parent-child or marital discord. Bowen’s Family Systems Theory suggests that unresolved family conflicts disrupt family homeostasis, leading to dysfunctional family patterns such as scapegoating or triangulation, which can escalate into violence (Bowen, 1978 ). Accordingly, previous studies have consistently found that unresolved conflicts within families can escalate, sometimes resulting in various forms of violence, including intimate partner violence (IPV; Stith et al., 2000 ) and child abuse (Cecil & Matson, 2001 ). There is a notable gap in understanding how the recurrence of various family conflicts shapes resilience processes, particularly regarding the sociocultural context of Chinese families in Hong Kong. Early identification and intervention are essential to mitigate these risks and promote healthier family dynamics. With respect to demographic characteristics, our findings indicated no significant gender differences in the occurrence of multiple family conflicts; however, a gender difference was observed in the context of singular family conflict (Table 2 ). This finding aligns with previous research indicating that family conflict is experienced similarly by both males and females (Shek, 1998 ). The absence of significant gender differences in multiple family conflicts suggests that interventions aimed at reducing family conflict may be broadly applicable and practical across genders. Thus, these interventions do not require substantial gender-specific modifications when addressing family conflict; instead, promoting the development and implementation of universal strategies is a more practical approach. In addition, our findings show that the frequency of family conflict does not significantly differ across age groups and marital status categories, suggesting that exposure to family conflict is a common experience. Notably, individuals with higher educational attainment tend to report more family conflicts. This is consistent with previous findings that individuals with a higher education background may exhibit heightened awareness and greater willingness to recognize and report family conflict (Papp et al., 2009 ) or elevated expectations regarding family relationships (Amato, 2010 ). Additionally, families residing in below-average housing space reported a higher frequency of family conflict. Hong Kong is renowned for its high population density and limited housing space, which can intensify minor family disputes and increase the frequency of family conflicts. Impaired social interactions within the family, such as family conflict, have been consistently linked to a range of adverse health outcomes across the lifespan. Given the unique challenges faced by families residing in overcrowded environments in Hong Kong, programs working with families should introduce strategies for managing interpersonal tensions in confined environments. Both intra-familial and extra-familial help-seeking emerged as significant protective resilience factors. Particularly, our results suggest that when family conflicts involve multiple family members, the increased complexity and potential for escalation may prompt individuals to seek support from broader networks, including friends, professionals, or community resources. Consistent with previous findings, families who actively sought help from the community, family, relatives, professional staff, and social services were better able to adapt to and manage the stress associated with recurring conflicts (Kim et al., 2008 ). By utilizing this coping approach, individuals can receive emotional affirmation, gain new viewpoints, and obtain practical assistance, all of which contribute to lessening experiences of isolation and helplessness from poor family relations (Rueger et al., 2016 ). While informal help-seeking within the family or community is common, our findings suggest that positive communication within the family can further enhance resilience. Previous research has consistently shown that family members who adopt direct communication approaches tend to experience reduced psychological distress and greater relationship satisfaction (Sillars & Canary, 2013 ). The combined implementation of direct communication and help-seeking strategies provides a holistic framework for reducing the escalation of conflicts and promoting mutual understanding. This dual emphasis is especially pertinent among families in Hong Kong, where it is crucial to uphold cultural traditions while simultaneously fostering adaptive coping mechanisms in intervention programs aimed at family conflict. Subsequent versions of the program could be enhanced by actively engaging family members, community leaders, and educational institutions, thereby reinforcing core principles and facilitating broader cultural shifts in communication practices, as well as diminishing enduring stigma associated with seeking help. In terms of family functioning, our results show that poor family functioning resulting from ongoing family conflict has contributed to a range of adverse health outcomes. This aligns with previous research demonstrating that individuals from families marked by persistent and unresolved conflict and dysfunction are at heightened risk for mental health conditions such as depression and anxiety (Payne & Marcus, 2008 ), as well as stress-related physical illnesses (Repetti et al., 2002 ). According to family systems theory, dysfunctional family dynamics can erode family relations, hinder effective communication, and compromise coping strategies, thereby increasing susceptibility to both physical and psychological health issues (Nichols & Davis, 2019 ). Therefore, promoting healthy family functioning by fostering emotional support, practical problem-solving skills, and adaptability within the family unit serves as a critical resilience factor when facing multiple family conflicts. Interventions that strengthen these aspects of family functioning may therefore enhance families’ capacity to cope with and recover from repeated family conflicts, ultimately supporting overall family well-being. Interestingly, our results revealed a negative association between family conflict and perceived social support. This finding aligns with previous evidence that low engagement with social support services is commonly reported in Hong Kong (Sum et al., 2024 ). The possible explanation for this finding is that collectivistic cultural norms, such as filial piety and the emphasis on family harmony, may discourage individuals from seeking external support. Within this social context, revealing family difficulties is frequently perceived as potentially bringing shame to the family or as a sign of personal inadequacy (Ng et al., 2022). However, research has shown that social support plays a critical role in buffering the negative effects of family conflict on psychological and physical health (Wang et al., 2011 ). Individuals who actively seek and receive social support report lower levels of psychological distress and are better equipped to manage interpersonal difficulties within their families, stemming from family conflict (Schermerhorn et al., 2007). Therefore, interventions in Hong Kong should adopt a multifaceted and accessible approach, combine with other forms of resilience factors, and integrate public education, community-based resources, and culturally sensitive service provision to promote social support services effectively. Future research is warranted to assess the efficacy of context-specific coping strategies and to identify additional methods for reducing stigma and improving family well-being within the Asian cultural setting. Several limitations to this study should be acknowledged. Firstly, the population surveys lacked individual identifiers, which limited the analysis to observing trends at the population level rather than enabling the longitudinal tracking of changes within the same individuals over time. In the current study, data employed for cross-sectional analysis were from a large family survey in Hong Kong, any potential causal inferences about the relations between resilience factors and family conflict could not be explored at this stage. Future research should consider employing longitudinal designs, which allow for the examination of changes and causal relationships over time. Secondly, as the sample predominantly comprised participants from working families in Hong Kong, the findings may lack sufficient representativeness for cross-cultural comparisons with populations in other regions. To gain a more comprehensive understanding of multiple family conflicts and their related health outcomes, future research should aim to include families from a broader range of socioeconomic backgrounds. Thirdly, careful consideration should be given to how family conflict is measured. Although the self-report instrument demonstrated satisfactory reliability in this study, responses may have been affected by social desirability bias. As a result, discrepancies may exist between the actual occurrence of family conflict and the frequency reported by participants. Finally, this study examined family conflict in a general sense rather than focusing on specific incidents. For future research, it would be valuable to recruit a larger and more diverse sample and to consider a broader range of family conflict types. This approach would support the formulation of more holistic and multifaceted intervention strategies. In summary, preventing family conflict is essential not only for fostering harmonious family relationships but also for safeguarding the physical and psychological well-being of family members. This study offers an important addition to the existing literature by investigating the complex mechanisms underlying resilience against family conflict and identifying practical approaches for the prevention and resolution. Evidence consistently demonstrates that unresolved or frequent family conflicts are associated with a range of adverse health outcomes, including an increased risk of depression and physical health problems (El-Sheikh & Erath, 2011 ). Therefore, early identification and intervention are critical to mitigating the negative effects of family conflict and promoting healthier family dynamics. The results hold substantial implications for both policy development and practical application. There is a clear need for the development and implementation of culturally tailored prevention programs that address the adverse health correlates of family conflict and equip families with effective communication and coping skills. Schools, community organizations, and healthcare providers should collaborate to provide more accessible resources and support services, particularly for families at higher risk due to socioeconomic factors such as low income, high living expenses, and crowded living conditions. Additionally, public health campaigns aimed at reducing cultural stigma and increasing awareness of the impact of family conflict can encourage help-seeking behaviors and early intervention. Future research should continue to explore context-specific coping strategies for preventing family conflict, as well as evaluate the long-term effectiveness of targeted intervention programs. Declarations Funding Declaration This research was supported by a grant from the Research Grants Council of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China (Project No. PolyU 15601022). Author Contribution All authors contributed to the study conception and design. Material preparation, data collection and analysis were performed by Shaolingyun Guo, Qiqi Chen and Ko Ling Chan. The first draft of the manuscript was written by Shaolingyun Guo and all authors commented on previous versions of the manuscript. All authors read, revise and approved the final manuscript. Data Availability The raw data are available from the Family Council of the Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region: https://www.familycouncil.gov.hk/en/research/research_value.html, but restrictions apply to the availability of these data. The processed data supporting the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author Qiqi Chen ( [email protected] ) upon reasonable request. References Abe-Kim, J., Takeuchi, D., & Hwang, W. C. (2002). Predictors of help seeking for emotional distress among Chinese Americans: Family matters. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology , 70 (5), 1186–1190. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-006x.70.5.1186 Amato, P. R. (2010). Research on divorce: Continuing trends and new developments. Journal of Marriage and Family , 72 (3), 650–666. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2010.00723.x Anderson, K. L. (2010). Conflict, power, and violence in families. Journal of Marriage and Family , 72 (3), 726–742. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2010.00727.x Bakhtiari, A., Kashefi, F., Pasha, H., Nasiri-Amiri, F., Bakouei, F., & Saffari, E. (2024). Role of family communication patterns as predictors of behavioral health among students of public universities in north of Iran. Journal of Education and Health Promotion , 13 , 120. https://doi.org/10.4103/jehp.jehp_1406_23 Bentler, P. M. (1990). Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychological Bulletin , 107 (2), 238–246. https://doi.org/10.1037//0033-2909.107.2.238 Bokharey, I. Z., Fahim, U., & Tahir, K. (2021). Family conflicts are bitter splits that hurt: A qualitative inquiry toward understanding the impact of family issues in functional neurological symptom disorder. Frontiers in Psychology , 12 . https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.652917 Bowen, M. (1978). Family therapy in clinical practice . Jason Aronson. Cecil, H., & Matson, S. C. (2001). Psychological functioning and family discord among African-American adolescent females with and without a history of childhood sexual abuse. Child Abuse & Neglect , 25 (7), 973–988. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0145-2134(01)00250-2 Chhabra, G., & Sodhi, M. (2012). Impact of family conflict on the psychosocial behaviour in male adolescents. Journal of Nepal Paediatric Society , 32 (2), 124–131. https://doi.org/10.3126/jnps.v32i2.6147 Cohen, D. M. (2004). Child behavior problems and family functioning as predictors of adherence and glycemic control in economically disadvantaged children with type 1 diabetes: A prospective study. Journal of Pediatric Psychology , 29 (3), 171–184. https://doi.org/10.1093/jpepsy/jsh019 Cummings, E. M., & Schatz, J. N. (2012). Family conflict, emotional security, and child development: Translating research findings into a prevention program for community families. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review , 15 (1), 14–27. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10567-012-0112-0 Cummings, E. M., & Davies, P. T. (2010). Marital conflict and children: An emotional security perspective . The Guilford Press. DeCarlo Santiago, C., & Wadsworth, M. E. (2008). Coping with family conflict: What’s helpful and what’s not for low-income adolescents. Journal of Child and Family Studies , 18 (2), 192–202. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-008-9219-9 El-Sheikh, M., & Erath, S. A. (2011). Family conflict, autonomic nervous system functioning, and child adaptation: State of the science and future directions. Development and Psychopathology , 23 (2), 703–721. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0954579411000034 Folkman, S., & Moskowitz, J. T. (2000). Positive affect and the other side of coping. American Psychologist , 55 (6), 647–654. https://doi.org/10.1037//0003-066x.55.6.647 Fosco, G. M., & Grych, J. H. (2013). Capturing the family context of emotion regulation: A family systems model comparison approach. Journal of Family Issues , 34 (4), 557–578. https://doi.org/10.1177/0192513X12445889 Goldenberg, I., & Goldenberg, H. (2013). Family Therapy: An Overview (8th ed.).). Brooks/Cole. Gottman, J. M., & Notarius, C. I. (2000). Decade review: Observing marital interaction. Journal of Marriage and Family , 62 (4), 927–947. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2000.00927.x Gudykunst, W. B., Ting-Toomey, S., & Chua, E. (2010). Culture and interpersonal communication . CA Sage Publications Inc. Guo, S., Chen, Q., & Chan, K. L. (2025). Social contextual factors, social support and accessibility of social services in the health and life satisfaction of family caregivers in Hong Kong. Bmc Public Health , 25 (1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-025-23307-w Hair, J. F. (2010). Multivariate Data Analysis: A global perspective . Pearson Education. Hong Kong 2021 Population Census - Thematic Report: Persons Living in Subdivided Units . (n.d.). https://www.censtatd.gov.hk/en/EIndexbySubject.html?scode=600&pcode=B1120113 Idler, E. L., & Benyamini, Y. (1997). Self-rated health and mortality: A review of twenty-seven community studies. Journal of health and social behavior , 38 (1), 21–37. https://doi.org/10.2307/2955359 Johnston, J. R., & Campbell, L. E. G. (1999). Impasses of divorce: The dynamics and resolution of family conflict . Free Press; Collier Macmillan. Jöreskog, K. G., & Sörbom, D. (1993). LISREL 8: Structural equation modeling with the SIMPLIS command language . Scientific Software International; Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. Kiecolt-Glaser, J. K., Gouin, J. P., & Hantsoo, L. (2010). Close relationships, inflammation, and health. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews , 35 (1), 33–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2009.09.003 Kim, H. S., Sherman, D. K., & Taylor, S. E. (2008). Culture and social support. The American psychologist , 63 (6), 518–526. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X Kitzmann, K. M. (2000). Effects of marital conflict on subsequent triadic family interactions and parenting. Developmental Psychology , 36 (1), 3–13. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.36.1.3 Koerner, A. F., & Fitzpatrick, M. A. (2006). Family conflict communication. The SAGE Handbook of Conflict Communication: Integrating Theory, Research, and Practice , 159–184. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412976176.n6 Koss, K. J., Cummings, E. M., Davies, P. T., & Cicchetti, D. (2017). Patterns of adolescent regulatory responses during family conflict and mental health trajectories. Journal of research on adolescence , 27 (1), 229–245. https://doi.org/10.1111/jora.12269 Kroenke, K., Spitzer, R. L., & Williams, J. B. W. (1999). Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) [Database record]. APA PsycTests. https://doi.org/10.1037/t06165-000 Lee, R. M., & Liu, H. T. (2001). Coping with intergenerational family conflict: Comparison of Asian American, Hispanic, and European American college students. Journal of Counseling Psychology , 48 (4), 410–419. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.48.4.410 Mak, W. W., & Cheung, R. Y. (2010). Self-stigma among concealable minorities in Hong Kong: Conceptualization and unified measurement. The American journal of orthopsychiatry , 80 (2), 267–281. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1939-0025.2010.01030.x Margolin, G., & Christensen, A. (1996). The continuance and spillover of everyday tensions in distressed and nondistressed families. Journal of Family Psychology , 10 (3), 304–321. https://doi.org/10.1037//0893-3200.10.3.304 Masten, A. S., & Monn, A. R. (2015). Child and family resilience: A call for integrated science, practice, and professional training. Family Relations , 64 (1), 5–21. https://doi.org/10.1111/fare.12103 Moos, R. H., & Moos, B. S. (2009). Family environment scale manual and sampler set: Development, applications, and research; Mind Garden. Inc.: Palo Alto, CA, USA . Ng, A. C., Phillips, D. R., & Lee, W. K. (2002). Persistence and challenges to filial piety and informal support of older persons in a modern Chinese society. Journal of Aging Studies , 16 (2), 135–153. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0890-4065(02)00040-3 Nichols, M. P., & Davis, S. D. (2019). Family therapy: Concepts and methods . Pearson. Oltean, I. I., Perlman, C., Meyer, S., & Ferro, M. A. (2020). Child mental illness and Mental Health Service use: Role of family functioning (family functioning and child mental health). Journal of Child and Family Studies , 29 (9), 2602–2613. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-020-01784-4 Papp, L. M., Cummings, E. M., & Goeke-Morey, M. C. (2009). For richer, for poorer: Money as a topic of marital conflict in the home. Family Relations , 58 (1), 91–103. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3729.2008.00537.x Payne, K. T., & Marcus, D. K. (2008). The efficacy of group psychotherapy for older adult clients: A meta-analysis. Group Dynamics: Theory Research and Practice , 12 (4), 268–278. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013519 Repetti, R. L., Taylor, S. E., & Seeman, T. E. (2002). Risky families: Family social environments and the mental and physical health of offspring. Psychological Bulletin , 128 (2), 330–366. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.128.2.330 Robertson, H. A., Kutcher, S. P., Bird, D., & Grasswick, L. (2001). Impact of early onset bipolar disorder on family functioning: Adolescents' perceptions of family dynamics, communication, and problems. Journal of Affective Disorders , 66 (1), 25–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0165-0327(00)00281-0 Rosseel, Y. (2012). Lavaan: An R Package for structural equation modeling. Journal of Statistical Software , 48 , 1–36. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v048.i02 Rueger, S. Y., Malecki, C. K., Pyun, Y., Aycock, C., & Coyle, S. (2016). A meta-analytic review of the association between perceived social support and depression in childhood and adolescence. Psychological Bulletin , 142 (10), 1017–1067. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000058 Saltzman, W. R., Lester, P., Beardslee, W. R., Layne, C. M., Woodward, K., & Nash, W. P. (2011). Mechanisms of risk and resilience in military families: Theoretical and empirical basis of a family-focused Resilience Enhancement Program. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review , 14 (3), 213–230. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10567-011-0096-1 Santini, Z. I., Koyanagi, A., Stewart-Brown, S., Perry, B. D., Marmot, M., & Koushede, V. (2021). Cumulative risk of compromised physical, mental and social health in adulthood due to family conflict and financial strain during childhood: A retrospective analysis based on survey data representative of 19 European countries. BMJ global health , 6 (3), e004144. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2020-004144 Schermerhorn, A. C., Cummings, E. M., & Davies, P. T. (2008). Children’s representations of multiple family relationships: Organizational Structure and development in early childhood. Journal of Family Psychology , 22 (1), 89–101. https://doi.org/10.1037/0893-3200.22.1.89 Shek, D. T. (1998). A longitudinal study of the relationship between family functioning and adolescent psychological well-being. Journal of Youth Studies , 1 (2), 195–209. https://doi.org/10.1080/13676261.1998.10593006 Shek, D. T., & Ma, C. M. (2009). The Chinese Family Assessment Instrument (C-FAI). Research on Social Work Practice , 20 (1), 112–123. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049731509355145 Sillars, A., & Canary, D. J. (2013). Communication, conflict, and the quality of family relationships. In A. L. Vangelisti (Ed.), The Routledge handbook of family communication (2nd ed., pp. 147–163). Routledge. Steiger, J. H. (1990). Structural model evaluation and modification: An interval estimation approach. Multivariate Behavioral Research , 25 (2), 173–180. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327906mbr2502_4 Stith, S. M., Rosen, K. H., Middleton, K. A., Busch, A. L., Lundeberg, K., & Carlton, R. P. (2000). The intergenerational transmission of spouse abuse: A meta-analysis. Journal of Marriage and the Family , 62 (3), 640–654. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2000.00640.x Sum, M. Y., Chan, S. K. W., Tsui, H. K. H., & Wong, G. H. Y. (2024). Stigma towards mental illness, resilience, and help-seeking behaviours in undergraduate students in Hong Kong. Early Intervention in Psychiatry , 18 (3), 181–189. https://doi.org/10.1111/eip.13455 Taylor, S. E., Sherman, D. K., Kim, H. S., Jarcho, J., Takagi, K., & Dunagan, M. S. (2004). Culture and social support: Who seeks it and why? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 87 (3), 354–362. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.87.3.354 Tjosvold, D., Leung, K., & Johnson, D. W. (2000). Cooperative and competitive conflict in China. In M. Deutsch, & P. T. Coleman (Eds.), The handbook of conflict resolution: Theory and practice (pp. 475–495). Jossey-Bass/Wiley. Tucker, L. R., & Lewis, C. (1973). A reliability coefficient for maximum likelihood factor analysis. Psychometrika , 38 (1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02291170 Wadsworth, M. E., & Compas, B. E. (2002). Coping with family conflict and economic strain: The adolescent perspective. Journal of Research on Adolescence , 12 (2), 243–274. https://doi.org/10.1111/1532-7795.00033 Walsh, F. (2016). Family resilience: A developmental systems framework. European Journal of Developmental Psychology , 13 (3), 313–324. https://doi.org/10.1080/17405629.2016.1154035 Wang, M. T., Dishion, T. J., Stormshak, E. A., & Willett, J. B. (2011). Trajectories of family management practices and early adolescent behavioral outcomes. Developmental Psychology , 47 (5), 1324–1341. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0024026 Yeh, C., & Wang, Y. W. (2000). Asian American coping attitudes, sources, and practices: Implications for indigenous counseling strategies. Journal of College Student Development , 41 (1), 94–103. Yi, W., Yu, X., Ye, B., Lin, L., & Liu, R. (2025). The longitudinal relationship between parental conflict and adolescents’ aggressive behavior in China: The mediating role of poor family functioning. Aggressive Behavior , 51 (3). https://doi.org/10.1002/ab.70029 Zimet, G. D., Dahlem, N. W., Zimet, S. G., & Farley, G. K. (1988). The multidimensional scale of perceived social support. Journal of Personality Assessment , 52 (1), 30–41. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa5201_2 Additional Declarations No competing interests reported. Cite Share Download PDF Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-7354207","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":515136749,"identity":"d098fba3-b396-45f3-bb4b-115d6ba2b7fe","order_by":0,"name":"Shaolingyun Guo","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Hong Kong Polytechnic University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Shaolingyun","middleName":"","lastName":"Guo","suffix":""},{"id":515136750,"identity":"ef489d20-6d43-4500-835c-26ac999a61d3","order_by":1,"name":"Qiqi Chen","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Hong Kong Polytechnic University","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Qiqi","middleName":"","lastName":"Chen","suffix":""},{"id":515136751,"identity":"c14b8417-6dcd-416c-aed5-53f15ea9a3be","order_by":2,"name":"Ko Ling Chan","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Hong Kong Polytechnic University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Ko","middleName":"Ling","lastName":"Chan","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2025-08-12 09:53:19","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7354207/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-7354207/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":92023599,"identity":"53b89059-5a24-40ad-9f7f-74f6bca97cf3","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-23 18:20:36","extension":"docx","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":222345,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"Manuscript.docx","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7354207/v1/293dedabd0876b5b208a3156.docx"},{"id":92023596,"identity":"3a0eca32-0dd6-4ed5-a94a-1dbb2ed9afc1","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-23 18:20:36","extension":"json","order_by":1,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":5837,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"c09db0d390784d8780c081f33373b54d.json","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7354207/v1/16840d108a0f642c197657d3.json"},{"id":92023600,"identity":"03468452-4b4f-42d7-b382-ebd015b362e8","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-23 18:20:36","extension":"xml","order_by":2,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":182930,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"c09db0d390784d8780c081f33373b54d1enriched.xml","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7354207/v1/1a863f670fae718b971a78e7.xml"},{"id":92023598,"identity":"0ea42f2c-7661-470f-ac4d-455e55121599","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-23 18:20:36","extension":"png","order_by":4,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":118535,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"Onlinefloatimage1.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7354207/v1/9348169d555037fbe6103410.png"},{"id":92023601,"identity":"b7a0800c-92f1-4a20-9888-4ea26782f4dd","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-23 18:20:37","extension":"xml","order_by":5,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":182078,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"c09db0d390784d8780c081f33373b54d1structuring.xml","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7354207/v1/19ffbfabd4105d125ae59e52.xml"},{"id":92023602,"identity":"f2bf7c91-60f4-4a0f-a57b-cbd0107a156e","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-23 18:20:37","extension":"html","order_by":6,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":194449,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"earlyproof.html","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7354207/v1/d0240a745de856d44afa891c.html"},{"id":92024015,"identity":"37a7cafb-e208-4cce-ab55-7d5cc81bc164","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-23 18:28:36","extension":"jpeg","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":222704,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eStructural model of family conflict, coping strategies, social support, family functioning and health condition\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage1.jpeg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7354207/v1/1acc495a8d2d2be6177465e8.jpeg"},{"id":92024222,"identity":"00bb404a-7659-4199-891d-9283910eb4de","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-23 18:36:37","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":1554367,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7354207/v1/b3579ec3-297a-4ce8-84ef-7208e9282c1b.pdf"}],"financialInterests":"No competing interests reported.","formattedTitle":"Resilience Factors Mitigating the Effects of Recurrent Family Conflict on Health Outcomes: Findings from a Territory-Wide Family Survey in Hong Kong","fulltext":[{"header":"Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe family environment is the context in which both adults and children form many of their most significant and close personal relationships, and their physical and psychological well-being depends on the quality of these interpersonal relationships and communication (Koerner \u0026amp; Fitzpatrick, 2006). Family conflict creates an environment that poses significant risks to the health and well-being of all family members, as it can undermine the quality of family relationships, disrupt healthy family functioning, and contribute to increased stress within the household (Cummings \u0026amp; Davies, 2010). Frequent and unresolved family conflicts place children, parents, and the overall well-being of the family at risk for a variety of problems. Conflicts between parents, as well as between parents and children, are major indicators of strained interparental and parent–child relationships and are associated with a range of health difficulties (e.g., Chhabra \u0026amp; Sodhi, 2012; Cummings \u0026amp; Schatz, 2012). A substantial body of research has shown that chronic and recurrent family conflicts can lead to mental health symptoms (e.g., depression; Koss et al., 2017) and general health problems (Santini et al., 2021). While many family conflicts are minor without lasting harm, unresolved or poorly managed conflicts can escalate, sometimes leading to family violence. Given the prevalence of family conflict and its potential to progress to violent incidents, this study aims to identify and understand protective mechanisms that mitigate the adverse health outcomes associated with multiple family conflicts. Such understanding is essential for fostering resilience to potential family violence and for designing effective interventions that enhance both family and individual well-being.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe occurrence of multiple conflicts within a family may serve as an indicator of conflict acceleration, wherein the frequency, intensity, and severity of family disputes increase the risk of family violence (Anderson, 2010). Family conflict seldom occurs as a single, isolated incident; instead, it typically emerges as a sequence of related disagreements that may intensify progressively (Margolin \u0026amp; Christensen, 1996). The accumulation and escalation of these repeated family disputes can create a persistently stressful family environment, which has been linked to both psychological and physical health problems (Johnston \u0026amp; Campbell, 1999; Kitzmann, 2000). To examine the impact of recurrent family conflicts on various health outcomes, we adopt a family systems perspective (Bowen, 1978), by focusing on the interactions and processes within the family unit rather than analyzing individual family members in isolation. This approach evaluates dimensions such as family communication, interaction patterns, and adaptive coping strategies to stress to gain insight into overall family relationships. Previous studies have identified the associations between poor family functioning and the degree of conflict present within a family unit, including the frequency of openly expressed anger and interpersonal disputes among family members (Yi et al., 2025). Consequently, family dysfunction resulting from higher levels of general family conflict is associated with both physical health problems (Cohen, 2004) and mental health issues (Oltean et al., 2020).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe way individuals handle multiple family conflicts can play a crucial role in preventing the development of negative health and psychological outcomes (DeCarlo Santiago \u0026amp; Wadsworth, 2008). However, not all families exposed to conflict inevitably experience adverse health outcomes and psychological symptoms, as some individuals exhibit resilience by successfully adapting to difficult familial situations (Walsh, 2016). Resilience, in the context of family systems, refers to the capacity of families to withstand and rebound from disruptive family circumstances, including conflict, while maintaining or even strengthening family functioning (Saltzman et al., 2011; Walsh, 2016). Research has identified several protective mechanisms that promote resilience in families experiencing conflict, including positive family communication patterns (Koerner \u0026amp; Fitzpatrick, 2006), the presence of external support systems (Folkman \u0026amp; Moskowitz, 2000), and effective coping strategies (Lee \u0026amp; Liu, 2001). Empirical evidence suggests that resilience correlates with lower levels of depression and anxiety (Fosco \u0026amp; Grych, 2013), as well as improved physical health among adults and children exposed to family conflict (El-Sheikh \u0026amp; Erath, 2011).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAlthough conflict has the potential to undermine family unity and individual health, the way in which families communicate amidst ongoing and multiple conflicts is a pivotal factor influencing the resulting outcomes. Direct communication is fundamental to building family resilience in the face of conflict, as it enables family members to work together in problem-solving, reach mutual agreement, and minimize internal disputes (Walsh, 2016). Empirical studies have demonstrated that direct communication is associated with reduced depression (Bakhtiari et al., 2024), greater satisfaction within family relationships (Sillars \u0026amp; Canary, 2013), and improved overall well-being (Robertson et al., 2001). Furthermore, direct communication reduces the likelihood of escalation of ongoing family conflict, as well as the risk of severe violence (Gottman \u0026amp; Notarius, 2000). However, there remains a significant lack of research investigating the possible cultural constraints and contextual variables that may affect the efficacy of direct communication as a coping mechanism for family conflict. Most of the existing research has concentrated on Western, individualistic societies that prioritize direct communication, while comparatively little attention has been paid to collectivist cultures or families (Gudykunst et al., 2010). Therefore, developing a more nuanced perspective that considers the situational and cultural variations in communication pattern is essential for achieving a more comprehensive understanding of resilience within the context of family conflict in contemporary East Asian societies.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFurthermore, the effectiveness and expression of social support as a resilience factor can buffer individuals and families against the stress associated with ongoing family conflicts (Masten \u0026amp; Monn, 2015). The protective role of social support is operated by various sources, including emotional, informational, and instrumental assistance, which collectively strengthen an individual’s capacity to manage family conflict (Wang et al., 2011). Despite the benefits of social support, previous research has found that families in Hong Kong may face several limitations in accessing and utilizing social support. Firstly, the accessibility of social support is influenced by the presence of shame associated with disclosing family issues (Guo et al., 2025), as well as by internalized negative perceptions related to revealing minority status (Mak \u0026amp; Cheung, 2010). Secondly, perceptions of stigma related to obtaining assistance beyond the family context may affect individuals’ willingness to access social support services (Taylor et al., 2004). In the social context of Hong Kong, social support is most effective when it complements, rather than supplants, other coping strategies such as direct communication and help-seeking both within and outside of families.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePrevious empirical evidence indicates that individuals from Asian cultural backgrounds often rely on extended family relationships and seek help from individuals outside the nuclear family unit to manage conflicts (Yeh \u0026amp; Wang, 2010). These external social networks can connect family members to non-professional resources, which are crucial for resolving family conflict (Walsh, 2006). Furthermore, the collectivist values, prioritization of family harmony, and strong sense of filial piety characteristic of Chinese cultures can influence how families in Hong Kong interpret and respond to family conflict (Tjosvold et al., 2000). Accordingly, informal help-seeking functions as an important mechanism for enhancing family resilience by facilitating individuals’ ability to manage challenging family dynamics to promote health and well-being (Abe-Kim et al., 2002). In Hong Kong, where rapid urbanization, high population density, and intense competitive work pressures contribute to family stress, the ability to seek support from various sources becomes increasingly effective. Given the social context of Hong Kong, informal help-seeking from family members or external sources constitutes a vital aspect of resilience and serves as a complementary approach to formal social support services. These social-contextual observations underscore the need for further research into how the integration of informal and formal support systems, especially when culturally adapted, can enhance family resilience and mitigate adverse health outcomes.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAlthough extensive research has explored the impact of specific forms of family conflict, such as marital discord, parent-child disputes and sibling rivalry, on health correlates, comparatively little attention has been drawn to explore the cumulative or interactive effects that arise when multiple family conflicts are experienced concurrently. Moreover, the mechanisms by which exposure to multiple, overlapping family conflicts influences resilience and health outcomes remain underexplored. While existing research has identified various individual resilience factors that may buffer the adverse effects of family conflict, there is a limited understanding of how multiple resilience factors interact and collectively influence health-related outcomes. Addressing these gaps would provide a more nuanced understanding of recurrent family conflicts and inform the development of culturally targeted interventions to support families among Hong Kong families. Drawing on a representative sample from Hong Kong’s Family Surveys, the present study extends this line of research by investigating: (1) the association between multiple family conflicts and health outcomes (i.e., physical health and depression), (2) the role of potential resilience factors that may buffer against poor physical health and depressive symptoms, and (3) combined effects of multiple protective mechanisms within the social context of Hong Kong.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Methods","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec2\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003eStudy Design and Procedure\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe study utilized data from the Family Survey conducted by the Family Council of the Home Affairs Bureau of the Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region. These surveys have been commissioned on a biannual basis since 2011 to provide updated information on changes and developments among Hong Kong families. The research team conducted fieldwork for the fifth wave of the Family Survey \u0026ndash; Thematic Survey from November 2021 to May 2022. Based on the Hong Kong Census and Statistics Department Frame of Quarters, the surveys employed a two-stage stratified sampling design within 3,500 living quarters. The survey sampled all persons regardless of gender, sexual orientation, religion, geography, disability, language, or culture. In the first stage, a list of quarters was randomly sampled by geographical area. In the second stage, a household member (excluding foreign domestic helpers) aged 15 or above was randomly selected using the last birthday method. The average response rate for the surveys was 63.5%. The current study included a sub-sample consisting of 817 respondents. Ethics approval for this study was granted by the Human Subjects Ethics Committee of the authors\u0026rsquo; affiliated university.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec3\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003eMeasures\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec4\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003eDemographics\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eParticipants were asked to provide their demographic information, including household size, marital status, age, gender, education level, employment status, and socio-economic status (SES) factors. Marital status was coded as 0 = \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003eMarried or cohabiting with a partner\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rdquo; or 1 = \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003eNot married or separated or divorced or widowed\u003c/em\u003e.\u0026rdquo; Education level was coded on a 3-point scale (0 = \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003ePrimary or lower education;\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rdquo; 2 = \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003eSecondary education;\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rdquo; 3 = \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003ePost-secondary education or above\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rdquo;). Employment status was coded as 0 = \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003eEmployed\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rdquo; or 1 = \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003eUnemployed\u003c/em\u003e.\u0026rdquo; We referred to the classification by the Census and Statistics Department of Hong Kong (calculated by family total monthly income per household member) and categorized the family monthly income into two groups (1 = \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003ebelow median family monthly income of Hong Kong\u003c/em\u003e;\u0026rdquo; 2 = \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003eabove median family monthly income of Hong Kong\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rdquo;). Respondents were asked to report their price-to-rent ratio or percentage of mortgage covered by their monthly income for the ratio of rent or mortgage to family income, which was coded as 1 = \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003eUnder 20%\u003c/em\u003e,\u0026rdquo; 2 = \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003e20%-49%\u003c/em\u003e,\u0026rdquo; 3 = \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003e50% or above.\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rdquo; The average living space per person was calculated by the median per capita floor area of accommodation in Hong Kong (\u003cem\u003eHong Kong 2021 Population Census - Thematic Report: Persons Living in Subdivided Units\u003c/em\u003e, n.d.), which was coded as 1 = \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003eBelow median\u003c/em\u003e,\u0026rdquo; 2 = \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003eabove median.\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rdquo;\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eDepressive Symptoms\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDepressive Symptoms were assessed as the outcome variable using the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9; Kroenke et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1999\u003c/span\u003e). PHQ-9 is a 9-item, self-administered screening tool for assessment of the severity of depressive symptoms. The questionnaires measure how often the respondents had been disturbed by any of the 9 items during the immediately preceding 2 weeks. Sample questions include: \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003efeeling down, depressed, or hopeless\u003c/em\u003e,\u0026rdquo; \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003efeeling tired or having little energy\u003c/em\u003e,\u0026rdquo; and \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003epoor appetite or overeating.\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rdquo; Participants\u0026rsquo; responses were scored on a scale of 0 to 3 (0 = \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003enot at all;\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rdquo; 1 = \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003eseveral days;\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rdquo; 2 = \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003emore than a week;\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rdquo; 3 = \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003enearly every day\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rdquo;). An overall score was computed by taking the mean score of all 9 items; a higher score indicated more severe depressive symptoms. The Cronbach reliability statistics for this scale were satisfactory (\u003cem\u003eα\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.91).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003ePhysical Health\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eParticipants were asked to rate their physical health using the Self-Rated Health (SRH) measure (Idler \u0026amp; Benyamini, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1997\u003c/span\u003e), which provides a subjective evaluation of an individual\u0026rsquo;s health status. This was operationalized as a five-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (excellent) to 5 (poor). A higher score indicated the participant\u0026rsquo;s perceptions of bad physical health.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eFamily Conflict Frequency\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eParticipants were asked to report the frequency of family conflict over the past two years using a 3-point Likert scale (0\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;\u003cem\u003enone\u003c/em\u003e, 1\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;\u003cem\u003esingular conflict: conflict with one family members\u003c/em\u003e, 2\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;\u003cem\u003emultiple conflicts: conflicts with two or more family members\u003c/em\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec8\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003eFamily Functioning\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eFamily functioning was assessed as the outcome variable using the Chinese Family Assessment Instrument (CFAI; Shek \u0026amp; Ma, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR50\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2009\u003c/span\u003e). CFAI is a 33-item, validated measurement of perceived family functioning in five subscales. Sample questions include: \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003efamily members care each other\u0026rdquo;\u003c/em\u003e (mutuality); \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003efamily members talk to each other\u003c/em\u003e (communication); \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003elack of harmony among family members\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rdquo; (harmony and discord); \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003eparents take care of their children\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rdquo; (parental concern); and \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003eparents force children to do things\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rdquo; (parental control). Respondents were asked to indicate their level of agreement with each item on a five-point Likert scale, ranging from 1 (\u003cem\u003every much fits our family\u003c/em\u003e) to 5 (\u003cem\u003edoes not fit our family\u003c/em\u003e). Reverse coding was applied to some items, and an overall family functioning score was computed by taking the mean score of all 33 items; a higher score indicated worse family functioning. The Cronbach reliability statistics for each subscale were satisfactory (all \u003cem\u003eα\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;0.7).\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003ePerceived Social Support\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePerceived social support was assessed using the Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support (MSPSS; Zimet et al., 1998), a brief instrument developed to evaluate individuals\u0026rsquo; perceptions of support received from three distinct sources: family, friends, and a significant other. The sample items include: \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003eMy family really tries to help me\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rdquo; (family); \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003eI can count on my friends when things go wrong\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rdquo; (friend); and \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003eThere is a special person in my life who cares about my feelings\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rdquo; (significant other). The level of social support was rated on a seven-point Likert scale (ranging from 1\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;not very supportive to 7\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;very supportive). A higher score indicated greater social support from family members, important others, and friends. The Cronbach reliability statistics for this scale were satisfactory (\u003cem\u003eα\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.95).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eDirect Communication\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe coping tactic of direct communication was evaluated dichotomously. Respondents were asked to report whether they had used direct communication with the conflict family member(s) as the coping tactic (1\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;\u003cem\u003epresent\u003c/em\u003e and, 0\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;\u003cem\u003eabsent\u003c/em\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec11\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003eHelp-seeking\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe coping tactic of help-seeking was evaluated dichotomously. Respondents were asked to report whether they had sought help from community, family, online resources, professional staff, public services, and social services, respectively (1\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;\u003cem\u003epresent\u003c/em\u003e and, 0\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;\u003cem\u003eabsent\u003c/em\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec12\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003eStatistical Analyses\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eDemographic, socioeconomic, and family factors were summarized in descriptive statistics. Between-group comparisons were conducted to examine the gender differences and the frequency of family conflicts by t tests/chi-square and ANOVA tests. Structural equation modelling (SEM) was applied to specify the structure between observed indicators and latent construct through a path diagram. The SEM approach allows for simultaneous testing of a model that consists of multiple separate hypothetical relationships (Hair, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e). Standardized regression coefficients were computed for paths between variables. Multiple indices were used to assess the model fit while testing both the measurement and structural models, including chi-square to df ratio or \u003cem\u003eχ\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e/df, the comparative fit index (CFI; Bentler, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1990\u003c/span\u003e), Tucker\u0026ndash;Lewis index (TLI; Tucker \u0026amp; Lewis, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR57\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1973\u003c/span\u003e), root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA; Steiger, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR52\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1990\u003c/span\u003e) and standardized root mean square residual (SRMR; J\u0026ouml;reskog \u0026amp; S\u0026ouml;rbom, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1993\u003c/span\u003e). The data for SEM were analyzed using R software version 4.2.3 and the \u003cem\u003elavaan\u003c/em\u003e package (Rosseel, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR44\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e). The statistical significance level was set at .05.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"Results","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec14\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003eDemographic Characteristics of the Participants\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eTable\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e shows the demographic characteristics of the respondents by gender. The total sample comprised 817 participants that completed the survey, of whom 150 (18.36%) reported having conflict with one family member and 95 (11.63%) reported having conflict with two or more family members. No significant differences were found between genders in the frequency of family conflict. Gender differences were observed in household size (\u003cem\u003et\u003c/em\u003e = -2.492, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.013). The respondents\u0026rsquo; mean age was 48.64 (\u003cem\u003eSD\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;15.26), with a significant gender difference (\u003cem\u003et\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;3.495, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001). A total 92.90% of the overall sample were married or cohabitating with a partner. Regarding employment status by gender, 7.44% of fathers and 5.39% of mothers were unemployed.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab1\" border=\"1\"\u003e\u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 1\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eDemographic Characteristics of the Participants\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/caption\u003e\u003ccolgroup cols=\"7\"\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c6\" colnum=\"6\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c7\" colnum=\"7\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cthead\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eTotal\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e(\u003cem\u003eN\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;817)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eMale\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eRespondents\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e(\u003cem\u003en\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;390)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eFemale\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eRespondents\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e(\u003cem\u003en\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;427)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eChi-Square or \u003cem\u003et\u003c/em\u003e-Statistic\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003edf\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e-value\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/thead\u003e\u003ctbody\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eHousehold size (\u003cem\u003eMean, SD\u003c/em\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2.16 (1.00)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2.07 (1.01)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2.24 (0.98)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e-2.492\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e803\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.013\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eGender\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eMale\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e390 (47.74%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eFemale\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e427 (52.26%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eAge (\u003cem\u003eMean, SD\u003c/em\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e48.64 (15.26)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e50.58 (15.58)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e46.86 (14.76)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e3.495\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e798\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eMarital status\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eMarried or cohabiting with a partner\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e759 (92.90%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e376 (96.41%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e383 (89.70%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e-3.839\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e715\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eSeparated/divorced/widowed\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e58 (7.10%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e14 (3.59%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e44 (10.30%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eEducational attainment\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003ePrimary education or lower\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e169 (20.69%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e82 (21.02%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e87 (20.37%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e-0.317\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e808\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.751\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eSecondary education\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e321 (39.29%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e154 (39.49%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e167 (39.11%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003ePost-secondary education\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e327 (40.02%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e154 (39.49%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e173 (40.52%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eSocioeconomic Status (SES)\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eUnemployment\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e52 (6.37%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e29 (7.44%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e23 (5.39%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e5.590\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e389\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eFamily monthly income (in HKD)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eBelow median family monthly income\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e448 (54.83%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e212 (54.36%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e236 (55.27%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.261\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e809\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.794\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eAbove median family monthly income\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e369 (45.17%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e178 (45.64%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e191 (44.73%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eRatio of rent or mortgage/Family income (\u003cem\u003eMean, SD\u003c/em\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eUnder 30%\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e727 (88.98%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e351 (88.20%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e376 (88.06%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e-0.87\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e815\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.383\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e30% \u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;49%\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e41 (5.02%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e18 (4.22%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e23 (5.39%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e50% or above\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e49 (6.00%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e21 (7.58%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e28 (6.55%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003ePer capita living space/average living space per person (\u003cem\u003eMean, SD\u003c/em\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eBelow median\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e616 (75.40%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e288 (73.85%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e328 (76.82%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.982\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e801\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.327\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eAbove median\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e201 (24.60%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e102 (26.15%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e99 (23.18%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eFamily functioning\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1.94 (0.57)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1.94 (0.56)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1.96 (0.58)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e-0.589\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e813\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.556\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eFamily conflict\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eMultiple conflicts with 2 or more family members\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e95 (11.63%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e45 (11.54%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e50 (11.71%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e-1.352\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e810\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.177\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eSingular conflict with 1 family member\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e150 (18.36%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e59 (15.13%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e91 (21.31%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eNo conflict with anyone\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e572 (70.01%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e286 (73.33%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e286 (66.98%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eCoping strategy for resilience\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eDirect communication with the conflict member\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e127 (15.55%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e58 (14.87%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e69 (16.16%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e-0.508\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e812\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.612\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eHelp-seeking\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e65 (7.96%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e33 (8.46%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e32 (7.49%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.509\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e798\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.611\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003ePerceived social support (\u003cem\u003eMean, SD\u003c/em\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e5.23 (1.02)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e5.16 (1.00)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e5.29 (1.03)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e-1.776\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e812\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.080\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eOutcomes\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003ePhysical health (\u003cem\u003eMean, SD\u003c/em\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e3.10 (0.97)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e3.10 (0.99)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e3.11 (0.95)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e-0.258\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e802\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.797\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eDepressive symptoms (\u003cem\u003eMean, SD\u003c/em\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.36 (0.48)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.34 (0.49)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.39 (0.48)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e-1.452\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e806\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.147\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/tbody\u003e\u003c/colgroup\u003e\u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec15\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003eVariation in Individual Characteristics by Frequency of Family Conflicts\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eTable\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e shows the demographic characteristics of the respondents by the frequency of family conflict. No significant differences were found for household size, age, gender, or marital status. The t-test revealed significant differences in education levels (\u003cem\u003et\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;5.321, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.021), indicating that respondents with secondary education or higher reported a greater frequency of family conflict. Households with below-average living space reported a higher frequency of family conflict (\u003cem\u003et\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;4.334, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.038). Differences were also observed in coping strategies across various frequencies of family conflict. Among individuals who used direct communication as a coping tactic, 75 (50.00%) reported experiencing a single conflict with one family member, while 52 (54.74%) reported experiencing multiple conflicts with two or more family members. Approximately 65.0% of individuals who reported family conflicts involving two or more family members sought help from various sources, whereas only 2.0% of those who reported conflict with a single family member considered help-seeking as a coping tactic. Respondents who reported multiple family conflicts tended to experience worse depressive symptoms (\u003cem\u003et\u0026thinsp;=\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;25.370, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab2\" border=\"1\"\u003e\u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 2\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eDescriptive Statistics by Family Conflict\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/caption\u003e\u003ccolgroup cols=\"7\"\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c6\" colnum=\"6\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c7\" colnum=\"7\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cthead\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eNo conflict\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e(n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;572)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eSingular conflict\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e(n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;150)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eMultiple conflicts\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e(n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;95)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eOne-way ANOVA \u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e-statistics or \u003cem\u003et\u003c/em\u003e-test\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003edf\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e-value\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/thead\u003e\u003ctbody\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eHousehold size (\u003cem\u003eMean, SD\u003c/em\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2.15 (1.02)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2.17 (0.94)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2.19 (1.01)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.137\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e815\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.711\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eGender\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eMale\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e286 (50%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e59 (39.33%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e45 (47.37%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1.825\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e815\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.177\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eFemale\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e286 (50%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e91 (60.67%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e50 (52.63%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eAge (\u003cem\u003eMean, SD\u003c/em\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e49.25 (15.64)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e46.81 (14.92)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e47.85 (13.25)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1.978\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e815\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.160\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eMarital status\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eMarried or cohabiting with a partner\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e533 (93.18%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e134 (89.33%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e92 (96.84%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.178\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e815\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.673\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eSeparated/divorced/widowed\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e39 (6.82%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e16 (10.67%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e3 (3.16%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eEducational attainment\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003ePrimary education or lower\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e127 (22.20%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e31 (20.67%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e11 (11.58%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e5.321\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e815\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.021\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eSecondary education\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e226 (39.51%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e56 (37.33%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e39 (41.05%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003ePost-secondary education\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e219 (38.29%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e63 (42.00%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e45 (47.37%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eSocioeconomic Status (SES)\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eUnemployment\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e35 (6.12%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e15 (10.00%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2 (2.11%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.300\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e815\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.584\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eFamily monthly income (in HKD)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eBelow median family monthly income\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e315 (55.07%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e85 (56.67%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e48 (50.53%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.307\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e815\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.580\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eAbove median family monthly income\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e257 (44.93%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e65 (43.33%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e47 (49.47%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eRatio of rent or mortgage/Family income (\u003cem\u003eMean, SD\u003c/em\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eUnder 30%\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e507 (88.64%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e137 (91.33%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e83 (87.37%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.000\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e815\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.988\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e30% \u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;49%\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e30 (5.25%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e6 (4.00%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e5 (5.26%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e50% or above\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e35 (6.11%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e7 (4.67%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e7 (7.37%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003ePer capita living space/average living space per person (\u003cem\u003eMean, SD\u003c/em\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eBelow median\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e421 (73.60%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e116 (73.33%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e76 (80.00%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e4.334\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e815\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.038\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eAbove median\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e151 (26.40%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e34 (26.67%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e16 (20.00%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eFamily functioning\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e3.79 (0.00)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2.17 (0.53)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2.16 (0.65)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e45.310\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e815\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eCoping tactic\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eDirect communication with the conflict member\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0 (0.00%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e75 (50.00%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e52 (54.74%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e503.500\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e815\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eHelp-seeking\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0 (0.00%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e3 (2.00%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e62 (65.26%)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e614.300\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e815\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003ePerceived social support (\u003cem\u003eMean, SD\u003c/em\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e5.23 (0.96)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e5.02 (1.29)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e4.99 (1.14)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e14.840\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e815\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eOutcomes\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003ePhysical health (\u003cem\u003eMean, SD\u003c/em\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e3.08 (0.97)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e3.21 (1.04)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e3.11 (0.87)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.667\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e815\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.414\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eDepressive symptoms (\u003cem\u003eMean, SD\u003c/em\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.31 (0.46)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.47 (0.50)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.53 (0.52)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e25.370\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e815\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/tbody\u003e\u003c/colgroup\u003e\u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec16\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003eCorrelational Analysis\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eTable\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e displays the correlations among direct communication, help-seeking, family functioning, perceived social support, and family conflict. As anticipated, family conflict and poor family functioning were positively correlated with each other. Significant associations were found between coping strategies and family conflict, such that the frequency of family conflict predicted the use of direct communication within the family unit and help-seeking from other sources. Poor family functioning was positively associated with both poor physical conditions and depressive symptoms. As expected, the higher level of perceived social support was significantly associated with better physical health and less depressive symptoms.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab3\" border=\"1\"\u003e\u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 3\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eCorrelations Among Coping Tactics, Family Functioning, Perceived Social Support and Family Conflict\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/caption\u003e\u003ccolgroup cols=\"8\"\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c6\" colnum=\"6\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c7\" colnum=\"7\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c8\" colnum=\"8\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cthead\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eFamily Conflict\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eHelp-seeking\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eDirect Communication\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eFamily Functioning\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003ePerceived Social Support\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003ePhysical Health\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eDepressive Symptoms\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/thead\u003e\u003ctbody\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eFamily Conflict\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eHelp-seeking\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.66***\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eDirect Communication\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.74***\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.35***\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eFamily Functioning\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.23***\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e-0.09**\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.12**\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003ePerceived Social Support\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e-0.13**\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e-0.03\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e-0.05\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e-0.53***\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003ePhysical Health\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.03\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e-0.02\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e-0.03\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.09*\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e-0.20***\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eDepressive Symptoms\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.17***\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.06\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.10**\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.34***\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e-0.41***\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.19***\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eMean\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.42\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.08\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.21\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e4.05\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e5.22\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e3.10\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.36\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eSD\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.69\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.27\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.41\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.57\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1.02\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.97\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.48\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/tbody\u003e\u003c/colgroup\u003e\u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec17\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003eStructural Equation Modeling\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eFigures 1 presents the results from SEM that tested the mediated model in which both coping strategies (e.g., direct communication and help seeking), family functioning, perceived social support, and health conditions (e.g., physical health and depressive symptoms) are represented. Model fit indices indicated satisfactory fit (\u003cem\u003eχ\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cem\u003e/df\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;6.312, \u003cem\u003eRMSEA\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.081, \u003cem\u003eCFI\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.963, \u003cem\u003eTLI\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.922, and \u003cem\u003eSRMR\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.050). Family conflict was positively associated with poorer family functioning (\u003cem\u003eβ\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.23, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001), which in turn was linked to worse health conditions (\u003cem\u003eβ\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.17, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.01). Family conflict was also associated with lower perceived social support (\u003cem\u003eβ\u003c/em\u003e = -0.14, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.01), while greater social support predicted better health outcomes (\u003cem\u003eβ\u003c/em\u003e = -0.52, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001). Higher family conflict was related to increased use of direct communication (\u003cem\u003eβ\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.62, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001) and help-seeking (\u003cem\u003eβ\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.60, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001), both of which were associated with better health conditions (\u003cem\u003eβ\u003c/em\u003e = -0.15, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.01; \u003cem\u003eβ\u003c/em\u003e = -0.13, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.01, respectively).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eFigure. 1\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec18\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003eStructural model of family conflict, coping strategies, social support, family functioning and health condition\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe bootstrapping approach was used to generate 95% CIs (1,000 iterations) to confirm the significance of the indirect relationships in addition to the above direct effects. The mediation effect was significant if the confidence interval did not contain zero. As shown in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e, the all indirect paths including family conflict on poor health conditions through the perceived social support (\u003cem\u003eβindirect\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.027, 95% CI = [0.010, 0.049], \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.017), family conflict on poor health conditions through poor family functioning (\u003cem\u003eβindirect\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.016, 95% CI = [0.004, 0.029], \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.006), and family conflict on poor health conditions through help-seeking (\u003cem\u003eβindirect\u003c/em\u003e = -0.030, CI = [-0.070, -0.002], \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.047) and direct communication (\u003cem\u003eβindirect\u003c/em\u003e = -0.038, 95% CI = [-0.079, \u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;0.003], \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.041) were significant. The results indicated that all mediators played partial mediation roles.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab4\" border=\"1\"\u003e\u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 4\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eIndirect Effects with Estimated Bootstrap CIs\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/caption\u003e\u003ccolgroup cols=\"4\"\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cthead\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eIndirect Paths\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eEstimated Effect\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e95% CI\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e-value\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/thead\u003e\u003ctbody\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eFamily Conflict \u0026rarr; Perceived Social Support \u0026rarr; Poor Health Conditions\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.027\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e[0.010, 0.049]\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.017\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eFamily Conflict \u0026rarr; Poor Family Functioning \u0026rarr; Poor Health Conditions\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.016\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e[0.004, 0.029]\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.006\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eFamily Conflict \u0026rarr; Help Seeking \u0026rarr; Poor Health Conditions\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e-0.030\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e[-0.070, -0.002]\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.047\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eFamily Conflict \u0026rarr; Direct Communication \u0026rarr; Poor Health Conditions\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e-0.038\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e[-0.079, \u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;0.003]\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.041\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/tbody\u003e\u003c/colgroup\u003e\u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"Discussion","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe current study aims to investigate the resilience mechanisms through which exposure to multiple family conflicts affects general health and depressive symptoms among Chinese families in Hong Kong. Furthermore, this study systematically examines how multiple protective factors, including family functioning, social support, and adaptive coping strategies, interact to influence responses to family conflict. In line with prior research, our findings demonstrate that the multiple occurrences of unresolved family conflicts are linked to poor physical health and increased depressive symptoms, while emphasizing the existence of resilience processes that can mitigate these adverse effects. The results highlight the multifaceted nature of resilience against family conflict, which operates across various levels of the family system, including direct communication within the family unit, both intra-familial and extra-familial help-seeking, and engagement with external support networks. Consequently, robust family functioning and effective coping strategies facilitate constructive conflict resolution and mitigate adverse health and psychological outcomes. These findings contribute to a more comprehensive understanding of family conflict and offer valuable insights for the development of targeted interventions to assist families contending with persistent challenges.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eOur findings showed that multiple and unresolved family conflicts have been consistently linked to a range of adverse health outcomes. In line with previous research, chronic exposure to familial disputes can create a stressful family environment that undermines both psychological and physical well-being (Repetti et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR42\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2002\u003c/span\u003e). Furthermore, unresolved conflict can erode family functioning, leading to feelings of isolation and exacerbating depressive symptoms (Bokharey et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). Despite a growing body of literature examining family conflict and its impact on individual and family health and well-being, most existing research has focused on isolated or singular forms of conflict, such as parent-child or marital discord. Bowen\u0026rsquo;s Family Systems Theory suggests that unresolved family conflicts disrupt family homeostasis, leading to dysfunctional family patterns such as scapegoating or triangulation, which can escalate into violence (Bowen, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1978\u003c/span\u003e). Accordingly, previous studies have consistently found that unresolved conflicts within families can escalate, sometimes resulting in various forms of violence, including intimate partner violence (IPV; Stith et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR53\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2000\u003c/span\u003e) and child abuse (Cecil \u0026amp; Matson, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2001\u003c/span\u003e). There is a notable gap in understanding how the recurrence of various family conflicts shapes resilience processes, particularly regarding the sociocultural context of Chinese families in Hong Kong. Early identification and intervention are essential to mitigate these risks and promote healthier family dynamics.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eWith respect to demographic characteristics, our findings indicated no significant gender differences in the occurrence of multiple family conflicts; however, a gender difference was observed in the context of singular family conflict (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e). This finding aligns with previous research indicating that family conflict is experienced similarly by both males and females (Shek, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR49\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1998\u003c/span\u003e). The absence of significant gender differences in multiple family conflicts suggests that interventions aimed at reducing family conflict may be broadly applicable and practical across genders. Thus, these interventions do not require substantial gender-specific modifications when addressing family conflict; instead, promoting the development and implementation of universal strategies is a more practical approach. In addition, our findings show that the frequency of family conflict does not significantly differ across age groups and marital status categories, suggesting that exposure to family conflict is a common experience. Notably, individuals with higher educational attainment tend to report more family conflicts. This is consistent with previous findings that individuals with a higher education background may exhibit heightened awareness and greater willingness to recognize and report family conflict (Papp et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR40\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2009\u003c/span\u003e) or elevated expectations regarding family relationships (Amato, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e). Additionally, families residing in below-average housing space reported a higher frequency of family conflict. Hong Kong is renowned for its high population density and limited housing space, which can intensify minor family disputes and increase the frequency of family conflicts. Impaired social interactions within the family, such as family conflict, have been consistently linked to a range of adverse health outcomes across the lifespan. Given the unique challenges faced by families residing in overcrowded environments in Hong Kong, programs working with families should introduce strategies for managing interpersonal tensions in confined environments.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eBoth intra-familial and extra-familial help-seeking emerged as significant protective resilience factors. Particularly, our results suggest that when family conflicts involve multiple family members, the increased complexity and potential for escalation may prompt individuals to seek support from broader networks, including friends, professionals, or community resources. Consistent with previous findings, families who actively sought help from the community, family, relatives, professional staff, and social services were better able to adapt to and manage the stress associated with recurring conflicts (Kim et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2008\u003c/span\u003e). By utilizing this coping approach, individuals can receive emotional affirmation, gain new viewpoints, and obtain practical assistance, all of which contribute to lessening experiences of isolation and helplessness from poor family relations (Rueger et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR45\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e). While informal help-seeking within the family or community is common, our findings suggest that positive communication within the family can further enhance resilience. Previous research has consistently shown that family members who adopt direct communication approaches tend to experience reduced psychological distress and greater relationship satisfaction (Sillars \u0026amp; Canary, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR51\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e). The combined implementation of direct communication and help-seeking strategies provides a holistic framework for reducing the escalation of conflicts and promoting mutual understanding. This dual emphasis is especially pertinent among families in Hong Kong, where it is crucial to uphold cultural traditions while simultaneously fostering adaptive coping mechanisms in intervention programs aimed at family conflict. Subsequent versions of the program could be enhanced by actively engaging family members, community leaders, and educational institutions, thereby reinforcing core principles and facilitating broader cultural shifts in communication practices, as well as diminishing enduring stigma associated with seeking help.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn terms of family functioning, our results show that poor family functioning resulting from ongoing family conflict has contributed to a range of adverse health outcomes. This aligns with previous research demonstrating that individuals from families marked by persistent and unresolved conflict and dysfunction are at heightened risk for mental health conditions such as depression and anxiety (Payne \u0026amp; Marcus, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR41\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2008\u003c/span\u003e), as well as stress-related physical illnesses (Repetti et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR42\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2002\u003c/span\u003e). According to family systems theory, dysfunctional family dynamics can erode family relations, hinder effective communication, and compromise coping strategies, thereby increasing susceptibility to both physical and psychological health issues (Nichols \u0026amp; Davis, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR38\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e). Therefore, promoting healthy family functioning by fostering emotional support, practical problem-solving skills, and adaptability within the family unit serves as a critical resilience factor when facing multiple family conflicts. Interventions that strengthen these aspects of family functioning may therefore enhance families\u0026rsquo; capacity to cope with and recover from repeated family conflicts, ultimately supporting overall family well-being.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eInterestingly, our results revealed a negative association between family conflict and perceived social support. This finding aligns with previous evidence that low engagement with social support services is commonly reported in Hong Kong (Sum et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR54\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). The possible explanation for this finding is that collectivistic cultural norms, such as filial piety and the emphasis on family harmony, may discourage individuals from seeking external support. Within this social context, revealing family difficulties is frequently perceived as potentially bringing shame to the family or as a sign of personal inadequacy (Ng et al., 2022). However, research has shown that social support plays a critical role in buffering the negative effects of family conflict on psychological and physical health (Wang et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR60\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e). Individuals who actively seek and receive social support report lower levels of psychological distress and are better equipped to manage interpersonal difficulties within their families, stemming from family conflict (Schermerhorn et al., 2007). Therefore, interventions in Hong Kong should adopt a multifaceted and accessible approach, combine with other forms of resilience factors, and integrate public education, community-based resources, and culturally sensitive service provision to promote social support services effectively. Future research is warranted to assess the efficacy of context-specific coping strategies and to identify additional methods for reducing stigma and improving family well-being within the Asian cultural setting.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eSeveral limitations to this study should be acknowledged. Firstly, the population surveys lacked individual identifiers, which limited the analysis to observing trends at the population level rather than enabling the longitudinal tracking of changes within the same individuals over time. In the current study, data employed for cross-sectional analysis were from a large family survey in Hong Kong, any potential causal inferences about the relations between resilience factors and family conflict could not be explored at this stage. Future research should consider employing longitudinal designs, which allow for the examination of changes and causal relationships over time. Secondly, as the sample predominantly comprised participants from working families in Hong Kong, the findings may lack sufficient representativeness for cross-cultural comparisons with populations in other regions. To gain a more comprehensive understanding of multiple family conflicts and their related health outcomes, future research should aim to include families from a broader range of socioeconomic backgrounds. Thirdly, careful consideration should be given to how family conflict is measured. Although the self-report instrument demonstrated satisfactory reliability in this study, responses may have been affected by social desirability bias. As a result, discrepancies may exist between the actual occurrence of family conflict and the frequency reported by participants. Finally, this study examined family conflict in a general sense rather than focusing on specific incidents. For future research, it would be valuable to recruit a larger and more diverse sample and to consider a broader range of family conflict types. This approach would support the formulation of more holistic and multifaceted intervention strategies.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn summary, preventing family conflict is essential not only for fostering harmonious family relationships but also for safeguarding the physical and psychological well-being of family members. This study offers an important addition to the existing literature by investigating the complex mechanisms underlying resilience against family conflict and identifying practical approaches for the prevention and resolution. Evidence consistently demonstrates that unresolved or frequent family conflicts are associated with a range of adverse health outcomes, including an increased risk of depression and physical health problems (El-Sheikh \u0026amp; Erath, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e). Therefore, early identification and intervention are critical to mitigating the negative effects of family conflict and promoting healthier family dynamics. The results hold substantial implications for both policy development and practical application. There is a clear need for the development and implementation of culturally tailored prevention programs that address the adverse health correlates of family conflict and equip families with effective communication and coping skills. Schools, community organizations, and healthcare providers should collaborate to provide more accessible resources and support services, particularly for families at higher risk due to socioeconomic factors such as low income, high living expenses, and crowded living conditions. Additionally, public health campaigns aimed at reducing cultural stigma and increasing awareness of the impact of family conflict can encourage help-seeking behaviors and early intervention. Future research should continue to explore context-specific coping strategies for preventing family conflict, as well as evaluate the long-term effectiveness of targeted intervention programs.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eFunding Declaration\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThis research was supported by a grant from the Research Grants Council of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China (Project No. PolyU 15601022).\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eAuthor Contribution\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eAll authors contributed to the study conception and design. Material preparation, data collection and analysis were performed by Shaolingyun Guo, Qiqi Chen and Ko Ling Chan. The first draft of the manuscript was written by Shaolingyun Guo and all authors commented on previous versions of the manuscript. All authors read, revise and approved the final manuscript.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eData Availability\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe raw data are available from the Family Council of the Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region: https://www.familycouncil.gov.hk/en/research/research_value.html, but restrictions apply to the availability of these data. The processed data supporting the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author Qiqi Chen ([email protected]) upon reasonable request.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAbe-Kim, J., Takeuchi, D., \u0026amp; Hwang, W. C. (2002). Predictors of help seeking for emotional distress among Chinese Americans: Family matters. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e70\u003c/em\u003e(5), 1186\u0026ndash;1190. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1037//0022-006x.70.5.1186\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1037//0022-006x.70.5.1186\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAmato, P. R. (2010). Research on divorce: Continuing trends and new developments. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Marriage and Family\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e72\u003c/em\u003e(3), 650\u0026ndash;666. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2010.00723.x\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/j.1741-3737.2010.00723.x\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAnderson, K. L. (2010). Conflict, power, and violence in families. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Marriage and Family\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e72\u003c/em\u003e(3), 726\u0026ndash;742. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2010.00727.x\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/j.1741-3737.2010.00727.x\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBakhtiari, A., Kashefi, F., Pasha, H., Nasiri-Amiri, F., Bakouei, F., \u0026amp; Saffari, E. (2024). Role of family communication patterns as predictors of behavioral health among students of public universities in north of Iran. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Education and Health Promotion\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e13\u003c/em\u003e, 120. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.4103/jehp.jehp_1406_23\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.4103/jehp.jehp_1406_23\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBentler, P. M. (1990). Comparative fit indexes in structural models. \u003cem\u003ePsychological Bulletin\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e107\u003c/em\u003e(2), 238\u0026ndash;246. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1037//0033-2909.107.2.238\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1037//0033-2909.107.2.238\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBokharey, I. Z., Fahim, U., \u0026amp; Tahir, K. (2021). Family conflicts are bitter splits that hurt: A qualitative inquiry toward understanding the impact of family issues in functional neurological symptom disorder. \u003cem\u003eFrontiers in Psychology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e12\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.652917\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3389/fpsyg.2021.652917\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBowen, M. (1978). \u003cem\u003eFamily therapy in clinical practice\u003c/em\u003e. Jason Aronson.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCecil, H., \u0026amp; Matson, S. C. (2001). Psychological functioning and family discord among African-American adolescent females with and without a history of childhood sexual abuse. \u003cem\u003eChild Abuse \u0026amp; Neglect\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e25\u003c/em\u003e(7), 973\u0026ndash;988. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/s0145-2134(01)00250-2\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/s0145-2134(01)00250-2\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eChhabra, G., \u0026amp; Sodhi, M. (2012). Impact of family conflict on the psychosocial behaviour in male adolescents. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Nepal Paediatric Society\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e32\u003c/em\u003e(2), 124\u0026ndash;131. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3126/jnps.v32i2.6147\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3126/jnps.v32i2.6147\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCohen, D. M. (2004). Child behavior problems and family functioning as predictors of adherence and glycemic control in economically disadvantaged children with type 1 diabetes: A prospective study. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Pediatric Psychology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e29\u003c/em\u003e(3), 171\u0026ndash;184. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1093/jpepsy/jsh019\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1093/jpepsy/jsh019\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCummings, E. M., \u0026amp; Schatz, J. N. (2012). Family conflict, emotional security, and child development: Translating research findings into a prevention program for community families. \u003cem\u003eClinical Child and Family Psychology Review\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e15\u003c/em\u003e(1), 14\u0026ndash;27. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s10567-012-0112-0\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s10567-012-0112-0\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCummings, E. M., \u0026amp; Davies, P. T. (2010). \u003cem\u003eMarital conflict and children: An emotional security perspective\u003c/em\u003e. The Guilford Press.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDeCarlo Santiago, C., \u0026amp; Wadsworth, M. E. (2008). Coping with family conflict: What\u0026rsquo;s helpful and what\u0026rsquo;s not for low-income adolescents. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Child and Family Studies\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e18\u003c/em\u003e(2), 192\u0026ndash;202. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-008-9219-9\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s10826-008-9219-9\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eEl-Sheikh, M., \u0026amp; Erath, S. A. (2011). Family conflict, autonomic nervous system functioning, and child adaptation: State of the science and future directions. \u003cem\u003eDevelopment and Psychopathology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e23\u003c/em\u003e(2), 703\u0026ndash;721. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1017/s0954579411000034\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1017/s0954579411000034\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eFolkman, S., \u0026amp; Moskowitz, J. T. (2000). Positive affect and the other side of coping. \u003cem\u003eAmerican Psychologist\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e55\u003c/em\u003e(6), 647\u0026ndash;654. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1037//0003-066x.55.6.647\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1037//0003-066x.55.6.647\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eFosco, G. M., \u0026amp; Grych, J. H. (2013). Capturing the family context of emotion regulation: A family systems model comparison approach. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Family Issues\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e34\u003c/em\u003e(4), 557\u0026ndash;578. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1177/0192513X12445889\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1177/0192513X12445889\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGoldenberg, I., \u0026amp; Goldenberg, H. (2013). \u003cem\u003eFamily Therapy: An Overview\u003c/em\u003e (8th ed.).). Brooks/Cole.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGottman, J. M., \u0026amp; Notarius, C. I. (2000). Decade review: Observing marital interaction. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Marriage and Family\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e62\u003c/em\u003e(4), 927\u0026ndash;947. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2000.00927.x\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/j.1741-3737.2000.00927.x\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGudykunst, W. B., Ting-Toomey, S., \u0026amp; Chua, E. (2010). \u003cem\u003eCulture and interpersonal communication\u003c/em\u003e. CA Sage Publications Inc.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGuo, S., Chen, Q., \u0026amp; Chan, K. L. (2025). Social contextual factors, social support and accessibility of social services in the health and life satisfaction of family caregivers in Hong Kong. \u003cem\u003eBmc Public Health\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e25\u003c/em\u003e(1). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-025-23307-w\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1186/s12889-025-23307-w\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHair, J. F. (2010). \u003cem\u003eMultivariate Data Analysis: A global perspective\u003c/em\u003e. Pearson Education.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003e\u003cem\u003eHong Kong\u003c/em\u003e 2021 \u003cem\u003ePopulation Census - Thematic Report: Persons Living in Subdivided Units\u003c/em\u003e. (n.d.). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://www.censtatd.gov.hk/en/EIndexbySubject.html?scode=600\u0026amp;pcode=B1120113\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://www.censtatd.gov.hk/en/EIndexbySubject.html?scode=600\u0026amp;pcode=B1120113\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eIdler, E. L., \u0026amp; Benyamini, Y. (1997). Self-rated health and mortality: A review of twenty-seven community studies. \u003cem\u003eJournal of health and social behavior\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e38\u003c/em\u003e(1), 21\u0026ndash;37. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.2307/2955359\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.2307/2955359\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eJohnston, J. R., \u0026amp; Campbell, L. E. G. (1999). \u003cem\u003eImpasses of divorce: The dynamics and resolution of family conflict\u003c/em\u003e. Free Press; Collier Macmillan.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eJ\u0026ouml;reskog, K. G., \u0026amp; S\u0026ouml;rbom, D. (1993). \u003cem\u003eLISREL 8: Structural equation modeling with the SIMPLIS command language\u003c/em\u003e. Scientific Software International; Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKiecolt-Glaser, J. K., Gouin, J. P., \u0026amp; Hantsoo, L. (2010). Close relationships, inflammation, and health. \u003cem\u003eNeuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e35\u003c/em\u003e(1), 33\u0026ndash;38. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2009.09.003\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.neubiorev.2009.09.003\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKim, H. S., Sherman, D. K., \u0026amp; Taylor, S. E. (2008). Culture and social support. \u003cem\u003eThe American psychologist\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e63\u003c/em\u003e(6), 518\u0026ndash;526. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1037/0003-066X\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKitzmann, K. M. (2000). Effects of marital conflict on subsequent triadic family interactions and parenting. \u003cem\u003eDevelopmental Psychology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e36\u003c/em\u003e(1), 3\u0026ndash;13. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.36.1.3\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1037/0012-1649.36.1.3\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKoerner, A. F., \u0026amp; Fitzpatrick, M. A. (2006). Family conflict communication. \u003cem\u003eThe SAGE Handbook of Conflict Communication: Integrating Theory, Research, and Practice\u003c/em\u003e, 159\u0026ndash;184. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.4135/9781412976176.n6\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.4135/9781412976176.n6\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKoss, K. J., Cummings, E. M., Davies, P. T., \u0026amp; Cicchetti, D. (2017). Patterns of adolescent regulatory responses during family conflict and mental health trajectories. \u003cem\u003eJournal of research on adolescence\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e27\u003c/em\u003e(1), 229\u0026ndash;245. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1111/jora.12269\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/jora.12269\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKroenke, K., Spitzer, R. L., \u0026amp; Williams, J. B. W. (1999). \u003cem\u003ePatient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9)\u003c/em\u003e [Database record]. APA PsycTests. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1037/t06165-000\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1037/t06165-000\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLee, R. M., \u0026amp; Liu, H. T. (2001). Coping with intergenerational family conflict: Comparison of Asian American, Hispanic, and European American college students. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Counseling Psychology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e48\u003c/em\u003e(4), 410\u0026ndash;419. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.48.4.410\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1037/0022-0167.48.4.410\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMak, W. W., \u0026amp; Cheung, R. Y. (2010). Self-stigma among concealable minorities in Hong Kong: Conceptualization and unified measurement. \u003cem\u003eThe American journal of orthopsychiatry\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e80\u003c/em\u003e(2), 267\u0026ndash;281. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1111/j.1939-0025.2010.01030.x\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/j.1939-0025.2010.01030.x\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMargolin, G., \u0026amp; Christensen, A. (1996). The continuance and spillover of everyday tensions in distressed and nondistressed families. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Family Psychology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e10\u003c/em\u003e(3), 304\u0026ndash;321. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1037//0893-3200.10.3.304\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1037//0893-3200.10.3.304\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMasten, A. S., \u0026amp; Monn, A. R. (2015). Child and family resilience: A call for integrated science, practice, and professional training. \u003cem\u003eFamily Relations\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e64\u003c/em\u003e(1), 5\u0026ndash;21. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1111/fare.12103\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/fare.12103\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMoos, R. H., \u0026amp; Moos, B. S. (2009). Family environment scale manual and sampler set: Development, applications, and research; Mind Garden. \u003cem\u003eInc.: Palo Alto, CA, USA\u003c/em\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eNg, A. C., Phillips, D. R., \u0026amp; Lee, W. K. (2002). Persistence and challenges to filial piety and informal support of older persons in a modern Chinese society. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Aging Studies\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e16\u003c/em\u003e(2), 135\u0026ndash;153. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/s0890-4065(02)00040-3\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/s0890-4065(02)00040-3\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eNichols, M. P., \u0026amp; Davis, S. D. (2019). \u003cem\u003eFamily therapy: Concepts and methods\u003c/em\u003e. Pearson.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eOltean, I. I., Perlman, C., Meyer, S., \u0026amp; Ferro, M. A. (2020). Child mental illness and Mental Health Service use: Role of family functioning (family functioning and child mental health). \u003cem\u003eJournal of Child and Family Studies\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e29\u003c/em\u003e(9), 2602\u0026ndash;2613. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-020-01784-4\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s10826-020-01784-4\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePapp, L. M., Cummings, E. M., \u0026amp; Goeke-Morey, M. C. (2009). For richer, for poorer: Money as a topic of marital conflict in the home. \u003cem\u003eFamily Relations\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e58\u003c/em\u003e(1), 91\u0026ndash;103. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3729.2008.00537.x\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/j.1741-3729.2008.00537.x\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePayne, K. T., \u0026amp; Marcus, D. K. (2008). The efficacy of group psychotherapy for older adult clients: A meta-analysis. \u003cem\u003eGroup Dynamics: Theory Research and Practice\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e12\u003c/em\u003e(4), 268\u0026ndash;278. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1037/a0013519\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1037/a0013519\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRepetti, R. L., Taylor, S. E., \u0026amp; Seeman, T. E. (2002). Risky families: Family social environments and the mental and physical health of offspring. \u003cem\u003ePsychological Bulletin\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e128\u003c/em\u003e(2), 330\u0026ndash;366. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.128.2.330\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1037/0033-2909.128.2.330\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRobertson, H. A., Kutcher, S. P., Bird, D., \u0026amp; Grasswick, L. (2001). Impact of early onset bipolar disorder on family functioning: Adolescents' perceptions of family dynamics, communication, and problems. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Affective Disorders\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e66\u003c/em\u003e(1), 25\u0026ndash;37. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/s0165-0327(00)00281-0\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/s0165-0327(00)00281-0\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRosseel, Y. (2012). Lavaan: An R Package for structural equation modeling. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Statistical Software\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e48\u003c/em\u003e, 1\u0026ndash;36. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v048.i02\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.18637/jss.v048.i02\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRueger, S. Y., Malecki, C. K., Pyun, Y., Aycock, C., \u0026amp; Coyle, S. (2016). A meta-analytic review of the association between perceived social support and depression in childhood and adolescence. \u003cem\u003ePsychological Bulletin\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e142\u003c/em\u003e(10), 1017\u0026ndash;1067. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000058\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1037/bul0000058\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSaltzman, W. R., Lester, P., Beardslee, W. R., Layne, C. M., Woodward, K., \u0026amp; Nash, W. P. (2011). Mechanisms of risk and resilience in military families: Theoretical and empirical basis of a family-focused Resilience Enhancement Program. \u003cem\u003eClinical Child and Family Psychology Review\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e14\u003c/em\u003e(3), 213\u0026ndash;230. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s10567-011-0096-1\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s10567-011-0096-1\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSantini, Z. I., Koyanagi, A., Stewart-Brown, S., Perry, B. D., Marmot, M., \u0026amp; Koushede, V. (2021). Cumulative risk of compromised physical, mental and social health in adulthood due to family conflict and financial strain during childhood: A retrospective analysis based on survey data representative of 19 European countries. \u003cem\u003eBMJ global health\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e6\u003c/em\u003e(3), e004144. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2020-004144\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1136/bmjgh-2020-004144\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSchermerhorn, A. C., Cummings, E. M., \u0026amp; Davies, P. T. (2008). Children\u0026rsquo;s representations of multiple family relationships: Organizational Structure and development in early childhood. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Family Psychology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e22\u003c/em\u003e(1), 89\u0026ndash;101. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1037/0893-3200.22.1.89\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1037/0893-3200.22.1.89\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eShek, D. T. (1998). A longitudinal study of the relationship between family functioning and adolescent psychological well-being. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Youth Studies\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e1\u003c/em\u003e(2), 195\u0026ndash;209. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/13676261.1998.10593006\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/13676261.1998.10593006\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eShek, D. T., \u0026amp; Ma, C. M. (2009). The Chinese Family Assessment Instrument (C-FAI). \u003cem\u003eResearch on Social Work Practice\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e20\u003c/em\u003e(1), 112\u0026ndash;123. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1177/1049731509355145\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1177/1049731509355145\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSillars, A., \u0026amp; Canary, D. J. (2013). Communication, conflict, and the quality of family relationships. In A. L. Vangelisti (Ed.), \u003cem\u003eThe Routledge handbook of family communication\u003c/em\u003e (2nd ed., pp. 147\u0026ndash;163). Routledge.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSteiger, J. H. (1990). Structural model evaluation and modification: An interval estimation approach. \u003cem\u003eMultivariate Behavioral Research\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e25\u003c/em\u003e(2), 173\u0026ndash;180. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1207/s15327906mbr2502_4\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1207/s15327906mbr2502_4\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eStith, S. M., Rosen, K. H., Middleton, K. A., Busch, A. L., Lundeberg, K., \u0026amp; Carlton, R. P. (2000). The intergenerational transmission of spouse abuse: A meta-analysis. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Marriage and the Family\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e62\u003c/em\u003e(3), 640\u0026ndash;654. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2000.00640.x\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/j.1741-3737.2000.00640.x\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSum, M. Y., Chan, S. K. W., Tsui, H. K. H., \u0026amp; Wong, G. H. Y. (2024). Stigma towards mental illness, resilience, and help-seeking behaviours in undergraduate students in Hong Kong. \u003cem\u003eEarly Intervention in Psychiatry\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e18\u003c/em\u003e(3), 181\u0026ndash;189. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1111/eip.13455\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/eip.13455\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eTaylor, S. E., Sherman, D. K., Kim, H. S., Jarcho, J., Takagi, K., \u0026amp; Dunagan, M. S. (2004). Culture and social support: Who seeks it and why? \u003cem\u003eJournal of Personality and Social Psychology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e87\u003c/em\u003e(3), 354\u0026ndash;362. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.87.3.354\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1037/0022-3514.87.3.354\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eTjosvold, D., Leung, K., \u0026amp; Johnson, D. W. (2000). Cooperative and competitive conflict in China. In M. Deutsch, \u0026amp; P. T. Coleman (Eds.), \u003cem\u003eThe handbook of conflict resolution: Theory and practice\u003c/em\u003e (pp. 475\u0026ndash;495). Jossey-Bass/Wiley.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eTucker, L. R., \u0026amp; Lewis, C. (1973). A reliability coefficient for maximum likelihood factor analysis. \u003cem\u003ePsychometrika\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e38\u003c/em\u003e(1), 1\u0026ndash;10. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/bf02291170\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/bf02291170\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWadsworth, M. E., \u0026amp; Compas, B. E. (2002). Coping with family conflict and economic strain: The adolescent perspective. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Research on Adolescence\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e12\u003c/em\u003e(2), 243\u0026ndash;274. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1111/1532-7795.00033\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/1532-7795.00033\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWalsh, F. (2016). Family resilience: A developmental systems framework. \u003cem\u003eEuropean Journal of Developmental Psychology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e13\u003c/em\u003e(3), 313\u0026ndash;324. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/17405629.2016.1154035\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/17405629.2016.1154035\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWang, M. T., Dishion, T. J., Stormshak, E. A., \u0026amp; Willett, J. B. (2011). Trajectories of family management practices and early adolescent behavioral outcomes. \u003cem\u003eDevelopmental Psychology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e47\u003c/em\u003e(5), 1324\u0026ndash;1341. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1037/a0024026\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1037/a0024026\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eYeh, C., \u0026amp; Wang, Y. W. (2000). Asian American coping attitudes, sources, and practices: Implications for indigenous counseling strategies. \u003cem\u003eJournal of College Student Development\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e41\u003c/em\u003e(1), 94\u0026ndash;103.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eYi, W., Yu, X., Ye, B., Lin, L., \u0026amp; Liu, R. (2025). The longitudinal relationship between parental conflict and adolescents\u0026rsquo; aggressive behavior in China: The mediating role of poor family functioning. \u003cem\u003eAggressive Behavior\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e51\u003c/em\u003e(3). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1002/ab.70029\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1002/ab.70029\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eZimet, G. D., Dahlem, N. W., Zimet, S. G., \u0026amp; Farley, G. K. (1988). The multidimensional scale of perceived social support. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Personality Assessment\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e52\u003c/em\u003e(1), 30\u0026ndash;41. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa5201_2\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1207/s15327752jpa5201_2\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":true,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":false,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"Family Conflict, Resilience, Coping, Health, Depression","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7354207/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-7354207/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003eChronic exposure to multiple family conflicts has been linked to a range of adverse physical and psychological health conditions, including weakened physical health and increased risk for depression. This research sought to identify protective factors, including adaptive coping strategies, healthy family functioning, and strong social support, that promote resilience and contribute to health and well-being in the context of family conflict. Utilizing data from the Hong Kong Family Survey (N\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;817), this study investigates resilience factors that mitigate the impact of family conflict on adverse health outcomes, including poor physical health and depressive symptoms, through the application of structural equation modeling. The results indicated that 18.36% of respondents reported experiencing singular conflict with one family member, while 11.63% reported multiple conflicts involving two or more family members. The results of the structural equation modeling revealed that coping strategies, including direct communication and help-seeking, function as protective factors in the association between family conflict and poor health conditions. Poor family functioning resulting from family conflict exacerbates adverse health outcomes, whereas healthy family functioning has the opposite effect, mitigating these negative consequences. A negative association was found between family conflict and social support, suggesting potentially low engagement with social support services among Hong Kong families. The findings underscore that a combination of family-focused prevention, practical coping skill development, accessible support services, and culturally sensitive interventions collectively contributes to improved health outcomes by mitigating the adverse effects of repeated family conflicts.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Resilience Factors Mitigating the Effects of Recurrent Family Conflict on Health Outcomes: Findings from a Territory-Wide Family Survey in Hong Kong","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2025-09-23 18:20:32","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7354207/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"e1df724f-68a4-404f-b20f-a8f400bb52ee","owner":[],"postedDate":"September 23rd, 2025","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"posted","subjectAreas":[],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2026-05-12T08:54:19+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2025-09-23 18:20:32","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-7354207","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-7354207","identity":"rs-7354207","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"8U1c8b4HqxoKbykW_rLl7","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}