Mothers and Children See Mental Health Differently, But Agreement Grows With Age

When a teenager struggles with anxiety or depression, does the mother see what the child feels? A new prospective longitudinal study suggests that the answer changes with age. Researchers followed 224 mother-child dyads from adolescence, when the children averaged 14.2 years old, into emerging adulthood, when they averaged 22.3 years, and found that agreement between self-reports and maternal reports of psychopathology grows substantially over eight years of development. The work, published in Child Psychiatry & Human Development, offers some of the first longitudinal evidence on how informant agreement on a broad spectrum of mental health symptoms evolves from adolescence into adulthood, and it carries practical consequences for how clinicians and researchers should gather and interpret mental health information.

The study was conducted by Aline Debener and Ann-Katrin Job using data from the German Future Family project, a prospective longitudinal study that began in 2001 with 280 families recruited from randomly selected kindergartens in Braunschweig and later expanded with 197 additional families from socially disadvantaged urban areas. The project originally tested the effectiveness of the Triple P preventive parenting program and has tracked child and family development for more than 18 years. The analyses reported in the new paper drew on the 10-year follow-up in adolescence and the 18-year follow-up in emerging adulthood, both funded by the German Research Foundation. After excluding father-child dyads and families with missing participation, the final sample comprised 224 mother-child pairs, 52 percent of them daughters, with 98 percent of the reporters being biological mothers.

To measure psychopathology, the researchers used parallel questionnaires that capture the same symptoms from two vantage points. In adolescence, children completed the Youth Self Report while mothers completed the Child Behavior Checklist; in emerging adulthood, the pair became the Adult Self Report and the Adult Behavior Checklist. Each version yields scores for internalizing problems, such as anxiety and depression, and externalizing problems, such as aggression and rule-breaking, covering the previous six months. Internal consistency of the scales was high at both waves. The team also measured current psychological distress in children with the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire and in mothers with the Depression Anxiety Stress Scales, assessed the mother-child relationship through the Family Climate Scales, and derived family socioeconomic status from education, occupation, and income.

Agreement was operationalized as the correlation between the raw scores of the paired questionnaires. In adolescence, the correlations were moderate: r = .35 for internalizing problems and r = .40 for externalizing problems. By emerging adulthood, agreement had risen to r = .53 for internalizing and r = .50 for externalizing problems. A Steiger test confirmed that the increase for internalizing problems was statistically significant, while the change for externalizing problems was not, possibly due to limited statistical power or the greater observability of externalizing behavior, which may leave less room for consistency to vary. Notably, there were no significant differences at either time point between the levels of agreement for internalizing and externalizing problems, addressing a long-standing question about whether hidden emotional problems are harder to agree on than visible behavioral ones.

The categorical analysis of discrepancies told a complementary story. Using standardized difference scores, the researchers classified each dyad as showing agreement, a positive discrepancy in which the child reported more problems than the mother, or a negative discrepancy in which the mother reported more. Roughly two-thirds to three-quarters of dyads showed no relevant discrepancy at each wave, and discrepancies became less common over time. More than half of the dyads showed no discrepancy at either wave for either problem domain, and a shift from discrepancy to agreement occurred far more often than the reverse. Only a small minority of families maintained a stable positive or negative discrepancy across the eight-year span, and almost none flipped from one direction to the other.

The predictors of discrepancy differed sharply depending on its direction, a finding the authors emphasize as clinically important. When adolescents reported more problems than their mothers, the strongest predictor was the child’s current psychological distress: more distressed adolescents produced larger positive discrepancies, accounting for over half of the explainable variance for internalizing problems and about 70 percent for externalizing problems. Maternal distress played a smaller role. When mothers reported more problems than their children, the child’s male sex was the only significant predictor in adolescence, suggesting that mothers of sons may perceive more symptoms than their sons are willing to report, possibly because male adolescents downplay their difficulties while young women tend to show more openness about mental health.

Predicting discrepancies in emerging adulthood from adolescent variables proved possible only for negative discrepancies, where mothers reported higher symptom levels than their children. The adolescent discrepancy itself was the dominant predictor, explaining roughly 60 percent of the explainable variance, which points to a stable tendency among some mothers to overestimate their children’s problems. For externalizing problems, higher child distress in adolescence also predicted a larger negative discrepancy in adulthood, consistent with the idea that worried mothers may selectively attend to signs of trouble. For positive discrepancies in externalizing problems, the family climate mattered: less mutual affection combined with more shared leisure activities predicted larger discrepancies, with affection carrying the greatest relative weight. The authors suggest that mothers who perceive problems in their children may intervene more, generating conflict, or that children who share less affectionate relationships disclose fewer symptoms.

The study has limitations that temper interpretation. Fathers were excluded because too few participated, the sample contained few low socioeconomic status families, dropout analyses showed that families lost to follow-up had more mental health problems and greater vulnerability, and the second wave of data collection occurred largely during the COVID-19 pandemic, which elevated mental health problems in young adults. The adult questionnaires also lack German standardization, so raw and standardized scores were used without clinical cutoffs, and the item composition of the adolescent and adult questionnaires differs slightly. A post-hoc power analysis revealed statistical power ranging from insufficient to very high across models, which the authors link to the split samples required for analyzing positive and negative discrepancies separately.

Despite these caveats, the implications are substantial. The findings confirm that self-reports and maternal reports are not interchangeable at any age, yet each contributes unique information, and their convergence strengthens as children mature, possibly because young adults become better at articulating internal states and because their views gradually align with their mothers’ long-standing assessments. The authors recommend that clinicians routinely seek collateral reports beyond childhood and adolescence to sharpen diagnosis and individualize treatment, and that researchers weigh the direction of any discrepancy, the child’s current distress, the quality of the mother-child relationship, and the child’s sex when interpreting multi-informant data. They also call for studies including fathers, partners, and other informants, symptom-specific analyses, cross-cultural comparisons, and work extending beyond emerging adulthood, where the trajectory of informant agreement remains largely unexplored.

For a field that has long treated discrepant reports as statistical noise to be averaged away, this study adds to a growing consensus that disagreements between informants are signals worth reading. A mother who sees more distress in her son than he admits, or a distressed daughter who reports symptoms her mother misses, is not simply producing error; she is offering a perspective shaped by attachment, observation, and the developmental moment. As longitudinal cohorts age and multi-informant assessment becomes standard in both research and care, knowing when and why mothers and children converge, and when their divergent views carry clinical meaning, may prove as important as any single report itself.

Subject of Research: Longitudinal agreement and discrepancies between self-reported and mother-reported psychopathology from adolescence to emerging adulthood

Article Title: Agreement and Discrepancies of Self- and Mother Reported Psychopathology from Adolescence Until Emerging Adulthood: Results of a Prospective Longitudinal Study

Article References: Debener, A., & Job, A.-K. (2026). Agreement and Discrepancies of Self- and Mother Reported Psychopathology from Adolescence Until Emerging Adulthood: Results of a Prospective Longitudinal Study. Child Psychiatry & Human Development. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10578-026-02095-3

Image Credits: AI Generated

DOI: 10.1007/s10578-026-02095-3

Keywords: informant discrepancies, cross-informant agreement, psychopathology, adolescence, emerging adulthood, longitudinal study, mother-child relationship, internalizing problems, externalizing problems, psychological distress, Child Behavior Checklist, mental health assessment