J Autism Dev Disord (2010) 40:1274–1284
DOI 10.1007/s10803-010-0986-y
ORIGINAL PAPER
Optimism, Social Support, and Well-Being in Mothers of Children
with Autism Spectrum Disorder
Naomi V. Ekas • Diane M. Lickenbrock •
Thomas L. Whitman
Published online: 2 March 2010
Ó Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2010
Abstract This study used structural equation modeling to
examine the relationship between multiple sources of
social support (e.g., partner, family, and friends), optimism,
and well-being among mothers of children with ASD.
Social support was examined as a mediator and moderator
of the optimism-maternal well-being relationship. More-
over, the role of optimism as a mediator of the social
support-maternal well-being relationship was also evalu-
ated. Results revealed that family support was associated
with increased optimism that, in turn, predicted higher
levels of positive maternal outcomes and lower levels of
negative maternal outcomes. In addition, partner and friend
support were directly associated with maternal outcomes.
Implications for the development of interventions directed
at increasing the quality of social support networks are
discussed.
Keywords Autism
Social support
Optimism

Mediation
Psychological well-being
Introduction
Parents of children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD)
face numerous challenges, including obtaining a diagnosis,
finding appropriate treatment and educational programs,
and struggling with the financial burden of paying for
N. V. Ekas
D. M. Lickenbrock
T. L. Whitman
University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, IN, USA
N. V. Ekas (&)
University of Miami, PO Box 248185, Coral Gables,
FL 33124-0751, USA
e-mail: nekas@psy.miami.edu
123
services (Whitman 2004). As a result of coping with these
and many other challenges associated with raising a child
with ASD, parents report greater levels of depression
(Olsson and Hwang 2001), higher levels of stress (Benson
2006), and generally lower overall well-being (Ekas et al.
2009).
Social support has been identified as a critical factor that
reduces the negative psychological effects of raising a child
with ASD as well as other disabilities (Bishop et al. 2007;
Bromley et al. 2004; Hassall et al. 2005). In particular,
informal support, such as that provided by friends and
family, has been shown to be effective in reducing stress
among mothers of children with ASD. For example,
mothers of children with autism who perceive receiving
higher levels of support, especially from spouses and rel-
atives, report lower levels of depression-related somatic
symptoms and fewer marital problems (Dunn et al. 2001).
Several studies have also shown that mothers first turn to
their spouse for support, then to their immediate family,
and finally to other parents of children with disabilities (see
Boyd 2002 for a review).
Although different types of informal support have been
associated with increased well-being, research has not
systematically examined whether one source of informal
support is more effective than another in helping mothers
of children with ASD cope with stress. For example,
although mothers of children with ASD may turn to their
spouse first (e.g. Boyd 2002), their spouse may not be the
most effective support. It is possible that their spouse may
be equally distressed and unable to provide effective sup-
port (Coyne et al. 1990) and that extended family (e.g.,
parents, brothers, sisters, etc.) or close friends may be more
beneficial in promoting mothers’ well-being. Indeed,
research suggests that women turn to individuals outside
their marriage (e.g., friends and family) when they do not
J Autism Dev Disord (2010) 40:1274–1284
receive adequate support from their spouse (Julien and
Markman 1991). Moreover, among mothers of critically ill
children, social support from friends and family has been
shown to buffer the adverse effects of having low spousal
support (Rini et al. 2008). The current study investigated
the relative effects of three types of informal social support
(support from partners, other family members, and friends)
on the overall well-being of mothers of children with ASD.
In addition to the impact of extrinsic influences, such as
social support, characteristics of the individual may also
impact well-being. Previous research has found that
personality characteristics, such as locus of control and
hardiness, contribute to the well-being of mothers of chil-
dren with ASD (Dunn et al. 2001; Gill and Harris 1991;
Weiss 2002). One personality characteristic that may be
especially important in promoting better psychological
functioning in mothers of children with ASD is optimism.
Optimism refers to the tendency of an individual to expect
positive outcomes in life (Scheier and Carver 1985). There
is growing evidence that optimism is associated with better
physical and mental health outcomes in a variety of pop-
ulations (Achat et al. 2000; Conway et al. 2008; Scheier
and Carver 1992; Segerstrom et al. 1998). Optimistic
patients exhibit faster recovery from cardiac bypass sur-
gery (Scheier et al. 1989), and are more likely to employ
positive health practices (Scheier and Carver 1992).
Among mothers of adults with autism, optimism has been
associated with greater psychological well-being (Green-
berg et al. 2004). To date, there have been no studies
investigating the effects of optimism on the well-being of
mothers raising children with ASD. For that reason, the
present study also examined the effects of optimism on
maternal well-being.
Increasing research indicates that social support and
optimism are positively related (e.g. Dougall et al. 2001;
Park and Folkman 1997). Moreover, social support has
been proposed as an important mediator of the relationship
between optimism and psychological adjustment (Dougall
et al. 2001); specifically because optimistic individuals
appear to be able to establish greater social support
resources and build more effective social networks in times
of stress. Several studies have found evidence for this
mediational relationship among breast cancer survivors
(Shelby et al. 2008), survivors of traumatic events (Dougall
et al. 2001), and college students (Brissette et al. 2002).
These studies, however, have not examined the differential
impact of multiple types of social support.
Although social support has typically been considered as
a mediating variable, it is also possible that optimism may
mediate the social support-psychological well-being rela-
tionship. That is, a strong social support network may
promote a more optimistic outlook on life that, in turn,
fosters well-being. As a result of feeling loved and
1275
supported, an individual’s cognitive representations about
the future may be changed. Indeed, Karademas (2006)
found support for a model in which optimism mediated the
social support-psychological well-being relationship in a
community adult sample, but not for a model in which
social support mediated the optimism-psychological well-
being relationship.
Although there are limited studies examining the sepa-
rate effects of social support and optimism among mothers
of children with ASD (e.g., Bristol 1984; Greenberg et al.
2004), no studies to date have specifically examined the
dynamic relationship between these two constructs and
how the combination of the two impact well-being. In the
present study two competing models were examined: (a)
social support as a mediator of the optimism-maternal well-
being relationship, and (b) optimism as a mediator of the
social support-maternal well-being relationship. In addition
to the direct and indirect benefits of social support, it is also
possible that social support serves a moderating function
(Cohen and Wills 1985), with social support buffering the
negative effects of low optimism. Shelby et al. (2008)
found that, among women with breast cancer, high social
support moderated the adverse influences of low optimism
on psychological distress, well-being, and psychosocial
functioning. For this reason, the present study also exam-
ined the role of social support as a potential moderator of
the optimism-maternal well-being relationship.
Present Study and Hypotheses
The present study examined the relationships between
optimism, informal social support, and well-being in a
sample of mothers of children with ASD. More specifi-
cally, the role of three types of informal social supports,
spouse, friends, and family, were examined as mediators of
the optimism-maternal well-being relationship. In mea-
suring maternal well-being, both negative maternal out-
comes, such as depression, negative affect, and parenting
stress, and positive maternal outcomes, such as positive
affect, life satisfaction, and overall psychological well-
being were included. Past research has suggested that
positive and negative aspects of psychological functioning,
under typical conditions, may be separate dimensions with
different influences, whereas in times of elevated stress
these two dimensions become highly related (Ekas et al.
2009; Zautra et al. 2001). For this reason, it seems espe-
cially important for studies to include both negative and
positive dimensions in order to provide a more complete
picture of well-being in mothers of children with ASD,
who are susceptible to experiencing high levels of stress.
Consistent with previous research (e.g., Dougall et al.
2001), we hypothesized that optimism would be positively
associated with social support which, in turn, would predict
123
1276
increased maternal well-being. Furthermore, consistent
with previous research (e.g., Dunn et al. 2001) we expected
that partner support would be more effective than friend or
family support in this process. We also explored the role of
optimism as a possible mediator of the social support-
maternal well-being relationship. Finally, we examined
whether a higher level of social support buffered the neg-
ative impact of having low optimism. Consistent with
previous research (e.g., Shelby et al. 2008), we predicted
that social support, particularly spousal support, would
indeed serve as a buffer against the adverse effects of low
optimism.
Method
Participants
Participants consisted of 119 mothers who were part of a
larger study examining stress and well-being in families of
children with ASD. Mothers included in the present study
had at least one child younger than 18 years of age who
had been diagnosed with ASD. The majority of mothers
were married (82.9%); the remaining mothers were sepa-
rated, divorced, or widowed (11.9%) or single (5.1%).
Mothers were predominantly Caucasian (95%) and middle
class; specifically, 8.7% had annual household incomes
below $24,999, 55.7% earned $25,000–$74,999, and
35.7% made $75,000 or more annually. The majority of
mothers had some college or completed college (75.4%) or
completed postgraduate training (14.4%), while a smaller
percentage of mothers had a high school degree or less
(10.1%). Mothers ranged in age 23–61 (M = 40.13,
SD = 7.38). Children were between the ages of 2 and 18
(M = 9.45, SD = 4.08), and were predominantly male
(82.9%). Ten families had at least one other child who was
also diagnosed with ASD.
Procedure
Participants were recruited with the assistance of local
autism support groups and a regional autism service center.
A total of 311 families, who indicated preliminary interest
in being part of a research project, were contacted and sent
packets with a cover letter explaining the study, consent
forms, and the survey material. Families who did not wish
to participate in the study returned a prepaid postcard
indicating their decision. A total of 123 families completed
and returned the questionnaire in a prepaid envelope,
resulting in a 39.5% response rate. Four families were not
included in the final data analysis because they did not
meet the study requirements of having a child under the age
of 18 who was diagnosed with ASD.
123
J Autism Dev Disord (2010) 40:1274–1284
Measures
Optimism
The Life Orientation Test (LOT; Scheier and Carver 1985)
was designed to measure optimism as it relates to outcome
expectancies. The LOT contains 8 items asking participants
to indicate their agreement using a 4-point Likert-type
scale (1 = strongly agree to 4 = strongly disagree). Sam-
ple items included: ‘‘In uncertain times, I usually expect
the best,’’ and ‘‘I hardly ever expect things to go my way.’’
Items were reverse coded and a total score was created with
a high score indicating greater optimism. Adequate internal
consistency and test–retest reliability has been previously
established (Scheier and Carver 1985). Cronbach’s alpha
for this measure in the current study was .86, indicating
high internal consistency.
Informal Social Support
Informal social support was examined for the following
relationships: family (not including partner), friends, and
partner. Whalen and Lachman (2000) created the scales
using items that were adapted from a previous study
(Schuster et al. 1990). Mothers answered each question
using a 4-point Likert-type scale, (1 = a lot to 4 = not at
all). Social support was assessed through 4 items that were
similar for family, friends, and partner. The four items
were: (a) How much do they (family, friends, partner)
really care about you?; (b) How much do they understand
the way you feel about things?; (c) How much can you rely
on them for help if you have a serious problem?; and (d)
How much can you open up to them if you need to talk
about your worries? The partner support scale included two
additional items that asked: (a) How much does he
appreciate you?; and (b) How much can you relax and be
yourself around him? Items were reverse coded so that a
higher score indicates high support, and a separate score
was computed for each type of social support. Good
internal consistency has been found in previous studies
(Whalen and Lachman 2000). Cronbach’s alphas in the
current study were .87, .92, and .89 for friend, partner, and
family, respectively.
Parenting Stress
This measure of parenting stress was adapted from the
Parental Stress Items scale (Pearlin and Schooler 1978).
The original 7-item scale instructed mothers to indicate the
extent to which they experienced distressed feelings about
parenting. Sample items included: ‘‘How worried do you
feel?’’ and ‘‘How unhappy do you feel?’’ In an adapted
version used in this study, four positively worded items
J Autism Dev Disord (2010) 40:1274–1284
were added to reduce response bias and increase the reli-
ability of the scale (Bonds et al. 2002). A sample item
asked ‘‘How satisfied do you feel?’’ Mothers responded to
all items on a 4-point Likert-type scale (1 = not at all to
4 = very much so). Positively worded items were reverse
coded so that a higher score indicated higher levels of
parenting stress. An internal consistency of .87 for the
adapted version of the scale has been reported (Bonds et al.
2002). Cronbach’s alpha in the current study for this scale
was .89.
Positive and Negative Affect
The Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS;
Watson et al. 1988) is a 20-item questionnaire designed to
measure two dimensions of mood, 10 items reflecting
positive mood and 10 items reflecting negative mood.
Participants were instructed to indicate the extent to which
they experienced each mood state, using a 5-point Likert-
type scale (1 = not at all to 5 = extremely). A total score
was created for the two mood dimensions with a high score
indicating high levels of that emotion. High internal con-
sistency, adequate test–retest reliability, and external
validity with measures of distress and psychopathology
have been reported (Watson et al. 1988). In the present
study, Cronbach’s alphas were .86 for negative mood and
.89 for positive mood.
Depression
The Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression inven-
tory (CES-D; Devins et al. 1988; Radloff 1977) is a
20-item self-report questionnaire designed to assess depres-
sive symptoms in adults. Mothers were asked to indicate
how frequently they experienced various symptoms during
the last week, using a 4-point Likert-type scale (1 = rarely
or none of the time to 4 = most or all of the time). Posi-
tively worded items were reverse coded so that a high score
indicated greater overall depression. Previous studies have
reported high internal consistency, adequate test–retest
reliability, and good criterion and discriminant validity
coefficients (Devins et al. 1988; Radloff 1977). Cronbach’s
alpha for the current study was .92, indicating high internal
consistency.
Life Satisfaction
The Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWLS; Pavot and Diener
1993) is a 5-item questionnaire developed to mea-
sure global cognitive judgments about one’s life. Using a
7-point Likert-type scale, mothers indicated the extent to
which they agreed with each statement (1 = strongly dis-
agree to 7 = strongly agree). Sample items included: ‘‘In
1277
most ways my life is close to my ideal,’’ and ‘‘If I could
live my life over, I would change almost nothing.’’ A high
score indicated higher satisfaction. High internal consis-
tency and test–retest reliability have been previously
reported (Pavot and Diener 1993). Cronbach’s alpha in the
current study was .85, indicating high internal consistency.
Psychological Well-Being
The Psychological Well-Being Scale (PWB; Ryff and
Keyes 1995) is a 42-item self-report measure that assesses
well-being in multiple domains. A Personal Growth scale
assesses feelings of continued development, openness to
new experiences, and improvement in self and behavior
over time. An Environmental Mastery scale includes items
that evaluate the individual’s sense of mastery and com-
petence in managing the environment and controlling
external activities. A Purpose in Life scale assesses the
extent to which the individual has goals in life and a sense
of directedness, feels there is meaning to present and past
life, and has aims and objectives for living. Participants
indicated their agreement with each statement using a
5-point Likert-type scale (1 = strongly agree to 5 =
strongly disagree). Selected items were reverse coded so
that a high score reflected a higher degree of overall well-
being. An overall score reflecting psychological well-being
was employed in this study. Previous studies have found
moderate to strong associations between this measure and
measures of positive affect, negative affect, life satisfac-
tion, and depression (Ryff and Keyes 1995). Cronbach’s
alpha for this measure in the current study was .92 for
overall psychological well-being.
Analytic Strategy
Structural equation modeling (SEM) was used to test our
mediational hypotheses regarding pathways between social
support, optimism, and maternal well-being. All models
were estimated using the M-Plus 5.2 statistical package,
using the maximum likelihood estimation method. Multiple
fit indices will be reported for each model in order to
evaluate the degree to which our models are an appropriate
fit for the data. In addition to the traditional chi-square
statistic, the v2/df ratio indicates good fit if values are close
to 1, and an acceptable fit if values are less than 5 (Hu and
Bentler 1999). Additionally, a comparative fit index (CFI)
greater than .95 indicates a very good fit, although a CFI
value greater than .90 also indicates the model is an ade-
quate fit to the data (Hu and Bentler 1999). Finally, when
the root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) is
less than .06 then the hypothesized model is a good fit for
the observed data; however, if the RMSEA is less than .08
then the hypothesized model is an adequate fit for the data
123
1278 J Autism Dev Disord (2010) 40:1274–1284

(Hu and Bentler 1999). These alternative fit indices control ASD reported less friend support (F(1, 117) = 5.80,
for sample size (Hu and Bentler 1999). When deciding p \ .05), partner support (F(1, 108) = 6.67, p \ .05), and
whether a model is a good fit, each of these fit indices are family support (F(1, 116) = 9.57, p \ .01). In addition,
considered. mothers of more than one child with ASD also reported
The Baron and Kenny (1986) causal steps approach to higher levels of depression (F(1, 111) = 7.67, p \ .01),
mediation has been one of the most popular and frequently higher levels of negative affect (F(1, 114) = 9.59,
cited mediation analyses. Recently, however, studies have p \ .01), and lower levels of life satisfaction (F(1, 116)
shown that this approach results in an increase of the Type = 4.28, p \ .05). For these reasons, the number of addi-
II error rate. In addition, this approach does not provide a tional children with ASD was included as a covariate in all
simultaneous test of all paths being estimated, a direct mediation and moderation models.
estimate of the total indirect effect of the independent
variable on the dependent variable, or provide standard Descriptive Statistics and Correlations
errors to construct confidence limits (MacKinnon et al.
2002; Shrout and Bolger 2002). In addition, when models All variables were examined for skewness and kurtosis,
incorporate multiple mediators and multiple outcomes the and were found to be normally distributed. Therefore, the
traditional approach to mediation has difficulty evaluating data in the present study does not violate the normality
each of the individual effects (MacKinnon et al. 2002). In assumption of maximum likelihood estimation. For the
order to determine the significance of mediation, bias- variable of partner support, however, the kurtosis value was
corrected confidence intervals for the indirect effects were slightly higher than accepted values. Multicollinearity tests
constructed using a bootstrap approach with 500 resamples (e.g. variance inflation factor) between independent vari-
(MacKinnon et al. 2004). Resampling methods may pro- ables were conducted. No evidence for multicollinearity
vide more accurate results when sample sizes are low was found. Table 1 presents descriptive statistics for each
(Mackinnon 2008 p. 342). of the measures. In general, in comparison to low risk
Multiple linear regression analyses were conducted to samples, mothers reported higher degrees of stress (Bonds
test our moderational hypotheses regarding the effects of et al. 2002), higher negative affect (Watson et al. 1988),
the interaction between informal social support and opti- and levels of depression that were severe enough to warrant
mism on maternal well-being. Separate regression analyses a clinical diagnosis of depression (Radloff 1977), lower
were conducted for each form of social support (friend, positive affect (Watson et al. 1988), lower mean life sat-
spouse, and family), as well as for each outcome. Each isfaction scores (Pavot and Diener 1993), and lower levels
multiple regression model included control variables, of optimism (Scheier and Carver 1985). For the other
optimism, social support, and the optimism x social support measures, listed in Table 1, normative comparison data
interaction term. All variables were mean-centered (Aiken was not available.
and West 1991). Problems of missing data were minimal, As shown in Table 2, correlations support our hypoth-
as follow-up correspondence was sent to participants to eses concerning the relation between optimism, informal
obtain missing information. For individual items missing social support, and maternal outcomes. Specifically, a
on a scale score, a mean score was imputed if 90% of the
items on the scale had been completed. Table 1 Descriptive statistics
Mean SD Range Possible range
Results Predictors/mediators
Optimism 22.43 3.62 14–32 8–32
Demographic Relationships Friend support 13.25 2.74 4.5–16 4–16
Partner support 20.88 4.06 6–24 6–24
Relationships between demographics and all variables of Family support 12.70 2.99 5–16 4–16
interest were examined in order to determine whether any Negative outcomes
demographic variables needed to be included as covariates. Depression 33.60 9.90 20–67 20–80
Correlational analyses revealed that maternal age was not Negative affect 20.67 6.58 10–38 10–50
significantly related to any of the variables. In addition, Parenting stress 24.80 6.03 12–39 11–44
there was no significant pattern of associations between Positive outcomes
child age and any of the variables in the current study.
Positive affect 33.95 6.96 18–49 10–50
There were, however, significant differences between
Life satisfaction 21.99 6.63 5–35 5–35
mothers of one child with ASD and mother of more than
Psychological well-being 157.36 19.33 111–210 42–210
one child with ASD. Mothers of more than one child with

123
J Autism Dev Disord (2010) 40:1274–1284 1279

Table 2 Correlations between optimism, social support, and maternal outcomes

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

1. Friend support –
2. Partner support .29** –
3. Family support .38*** .08 –
4. optimism .25** .22* .29** –
5. Depression -.33*** -.40*** -.28** -.54*** –
6. Negative Affect -.26** -.31** -.21* -.39*** .59*** –
7. Parenting stress -.29** -.23* -.21* -.52*** .69*** .69*** –
8. Positive affect .27** .19 .07 .49*** -.48*** -.25** -.40*** –
9. Life satisfaction .32*** .50*** .18 .53*** -.63*** -.53*** -.56*** .36*** –
10. Psychological well-being .32*** .37*** .21* .59*** -.62*** -.50*** -.62*** .64*** .58*** –
* p \ .05; ** p \ .01; *** p \ .001

significant negative association was found between the
informal social support variables and maternal negative
outcomes. Mothers who reported higher levels of informal
social support also reported lower levels of parenting
stress, negative affect, and depression. Similar results were
found for the relation between optimism and maternal
negative outcomes. Further, consistent with our hypothe-
ses, a significant positive association was found between
both optimism and informal social support variables and
maternal positive outcomes. Mothers who reported higher
levels of optimism and informal social support also
reported higher levels of positive affect, life satisfaction,
and psychological well-being. In addition, we also found a
significant positive association between optimism and each
of the informal social support variables.
Mediation Analyses
In the first set of analyses, we used SEM to test whether
informal social support mediated the relationship between
optimism and maternal outcomes. As shown in Fig. 1, we
tested two separate hypothesized models, one containing
negative maternal outcomes and a second consisting of
positive maternal outcomes. Based upon the consideration
of multiple fit indices, the results of the SEM containing
negative maternal outcomes indicated poor model fit, v2
(4, n = 119) = 12.73, p = .01, v2/df ratio = 3.18, CFI =
.96, and RMSEA = .14 (90% CI: .06–.22). Similarly, the
results of the SEM containing positive maternal outcomes
also indicated a poor model fit, v2 (5, n = 119) = 12.73,
p = .02, v2/df ratio = 2.55, CFI = .96, and RMSEA = .11
(90% CI: .04–.19). Due to the poor overall model fit the
individual paths will not be discussed further. Thus, the
results suggest that social support did not mediate the
effects of optimism on any of the outcomes.
In the next set of mediation analyses, we used SEM to
test whether optimism mediated the relationship between
informal social support and maternal outcomes. As shown
in Fig. 2, we tested two separate hypothesized models, one
containing negative maternal outcomes and a second con-
sisting of positive maternal outcomes. Figure 3 presents the
results of the hypothesized model test. For the sake of
clarity, only significant paths are shown. The results of the
SEM containing negative maternal outcomes indicated a
good fit with the data, v2 (2, n = 119) = .46, p = .79,
v2/df ratio = .23, CFI = 1.0, and RMSEA = 0 (90% CI:
0–.12). The results of the SEM containing positive mater-
nal outcomes also indicated a good fit with the data, v2
(3, n = 119) = .58, p = .90, v2/df ratio = .19, CFI = 1.0,
and RMSEA = 0 (90% CI: 0–.07).
As hypothesized, several links between informal social
support, optimism, and maternal negative outcomes were
found (see Fig. 3a). Partner support was associated with
lower levels of depression. Optimism was significantly
associated with decreased depression, negative affect, and
parenting stress. In addition, an indirect relationship
between family support and negative maternal outcomes
was found. Family support was associated with increased
optimism; this increased optimism, in turn, predicted lower
levels of depression, negative affect, and parenting stress.
No direct effect between family support and any of the
negative outcomes was found, suggesting that optimism
completely mediated the relationship between family sup-
port and maternal negative outcomes. Confidence intervals
of the total indirect effects of family support on maternal
depression (95% CI: -.18, -.02) and parenting stress
(95% CI: -.20, -.01) based on 500 bootstrap sample did
not include zero, further indicating significant complete
mediation. The confidence interval of the total indirect
effects of family support on negative affect (95% CI: -.14,
0) terminated at zero, indicating that this indirect effect
may not be as strong.
Several significant associations between informal social
support, optimism, and maternal positive outcomes were

123
1280 J Autism Dev Disord (2010) 40:1274–1284

Partner
Support
A Friend
Support
Depression

Optimism Negative Other Child

Affect

Parenting
Family Stress
Support

Partner
Support
B Friend
Support Positive
Affect

Optimism Life Other Child

Satisfaction

Psychological
Family Well-being
Support

Fig. 1 Hypothesized models depicting social support as a mediator of the relationship between optimism and maternal well-being. Models
predicted negative maternal outcomes [a] and positive maternal outcomes [b]

A Optimism
Friend Depression
Support

Partner Negative Other Child

Support Affect

Family Parenting
Support Stress

B Optimism
Friend Positive
Support Affect

Partner Life Other Child

Support Satisfaction

Family Psychological
Support Well-being

Fig. 2 Hypothesized models depicting optimism as a mediator of the relationship between informal social support and maternal well-being.
Models predicted negative maternal outcomes [a] and positive maternal outcomes [b]

also found (see Fig. 3b). Friend support was associated
with increased positive affect. Partner support was associ-
ated with higher levels of life satisfaction and psycholog-
ical well-being. Optimism was significantly associated with
greater positive affect, life satisfaction, and psychological
well-being. Indirect effects between family support and
positive maternal outcomes were also found.. Specifically,
family support was associated with increased optimism;
this increased optimism was, in turn, associated with higher
levels of positive affect, life satisfaction, and psychological
well-being. There was no direct effect found between
family support and any of the positive outcomes,

123
J Autism Dev Disord (2010) 40:1274–1284 1281

Fig. 3 Model results depicting

optimism as a mediator of the A Optimism -.42
relationship between informal
Friend Depression
social support and maternal
Support
well-being. Models predicted
negative maternal outcomes [a] .28 -.29
and positive maternal outcomes -.27
.38 Partner Negative
[b]. Standardized path Support Affect
coefficients are presented. Only
significant paths are shown
.24 -.45
Family Parenting
Support Stress

B Optimism .47
Friend .20 Positive
Support Affect
.26 .43
.39 Partner .38 Life
Support Satisfaction
.23 .50
.24
Family Psychological
Support Well-being

suggesting that optimism completely mediated the rela-
tionship between family support and maternal positive
outcomes. Confidence intervals of the total standardized
indirect effects of family support on maternal positive
affect (95% CI: .02, .21), life satisfaction (95% CI: .02,
.19), and psychological well-being (95% CI: .02, .22) based
on 500 bootstrap sample did not include zero, further
indicating significant complete mediation.
Moderator Analyses
These analyses tested whether there was a significant
interaction between the various forms of informal social
support and optimism. Based on the results of the demo-
graphic analyses previously discussed, we controlled for
the presence of another child with ASD in the models
containing depression, negative affect, and life satisfaction.
Results from these analyses found no significant interac-
tions between the informal social support variables and
optimism when predicting maternal negative and positive
outcomes.
Discussion
Past research suggests that optimism and social support are
associated with increased well-being among mothers of
children with ASD (Bishop et al. 2007; Greenberg et al.
2004). Although not systematically investigated, research
has also suggested that informal supports, such as those
provided by partners, friends, and family may be particu-
larly beneficial in promoting maternal well-being in this
population (Boyd 2002). Moreover, research with other
populations suggests that optimism and social support are
positively related to each other and that social support
mediates the optimism-psychological well-being relation-
ship (Brissette et al. 2002; Dougall et al. 2001, Shelby et al.
2008). An emerging literature, however, suggests that
optimism may mediate the social support-psychological
well-being relationship (Karademas 2006). Little is known,
however, about how these processes unfold in mothers of
children with ASD. The present study was directed toward
understanding how these intrinsic and extrinsic factors
promote well-being among this population which is espe-
cially susceptible to experiencing elevated levels of stress
(Ekas et al. 2009). Three different sources of informal
social support, including partner, other family members,
and friends were examined as mediators as well as mod-
erators of the optimism-maternal well-being relationship.
One of the initial goals of this study was to examine the
simple relationships between informal social supports and
maternal well-being as well as that between optimism and
maternal well-being. We were especially interested in
examining whether three different sources of social support
(partner, other family members, and friends) were differ-
entially related to maternal outcomes. As seen in Table 2,
correlational data indicated that each source of social
support was associated with lower levels of depression,
negative affect, and parenting stress. With regard to posi-
tive maternal outcomes, social support received from

123
1282
friends was associated with increased life satisfaction,
positive affect, and psychological well-being, whereas
partner support was associated with increased life satis-
faction and psychological well-being. Finally, social sup-
port received from other family members was associated
only with increased psychological well-being. The corre-
lational data also indicated that optimism was negatively
associated with each of the maternal negative outcomes,
and positively associated with each positive maternal out-
come. In other words, higher levels of optimism were
associated with increased positive outcomes and decreased
negative outcomes. These preliminary results are consistent
with previous research highlighting the benefits of having a
good social support network (e.g. Dunn et al. 2001) and
having an optimistic outlook (e.g. Achat et al. 2000).
In the present study, another goal was to examine the
relationship between social support, optimism, and mater-
nal well-being. While the correlation results indicated that
optimism was positively related to each form of social
support, social support was not found to either mediate or
moderate the relationship between optimism and well-
being. This finding contrasted with those of previous
research (e.g. Dougall et al. 2001; Trunzo and Pinto 2003).
Optimism, however, was found to mediate the relationship
between social support received from family members and
both positive and negative maternal outcomes (see Fig. 3).
More specifically, greater family support was associated
with increased optimism. In turn, optimism was associated
with decreased depression, parenting stress, and negative
affect. Moreover, optimism was also directly associated
with increased positive affect, life satisfaction, and psy-
chological well-being. Taken together, the mediation
models indicate that each form of social support (partner,
other family members, and friends) is important for moth-
ers’ well-being, but that they operate in different ways.
Partners and friends appear to directly impact some aspects
of maternal well-being, whereas family support operates in
an indirect fashion by helping mothers become or remain
optimistic as they confront the challenges associated with
raising a child with ASD. Based on these results, it would
seem advisable for interventions to focus on strengthening
each of the informal social supports specifically because
each of the sources are associated, either directly or indi-
rectly, with unique sources of benefit for the mother.
The role of optimism as a mediator has not been
extensively studied in past research and, in fact, only one
previous study involving a community sample of adults has
reported similar results to that obtained in the present study
(Karademas 2006). The current study extended this pre-
liminary research by examining the relationship of social
support, optimism, and well-being in a population experi-
encing high levels of distress, mothers of children with
ASD. In discussing his cognitive architecture of
123
J Autism Dev Disord (2010) 40:1274–1284
personality, Cervone (2004) argued that behavior is based
upon knowledge, an enduring structural feature of per-
sonality, and appraisals. Cervone (2004) further suggests
that the knowledge structures contribute to the appraisal
processes through which individuals assign meaning to
particular situations. We similarly argue that social sup-
ports could be conceptualized as providers of knowledge as
well as providers of instrumental and emotional support.
Social supports empower the mothers by giving them hope
and leading them to positively appraise the future, in turn
reducing negative affect and engendering positive affect.
These findings also have possible implications for the
development of interventions directed at increasing well-
being in mothers raising children with ASD. One possible
implication is that such an intervention should focus on
increasing optimism. For example, cognitive-behavior
therapy (CBT) techniques, such as self-monitoring and
cognitive restructuring, have been shown to increase opti-
mism (Pretzer and Walsh 2001) through getting individuals
to monitor the positive aspects, changes and possibilities in
their life situation. In one study, Matthews and Cook
(2009) reported that self-transcendence, defined as main-
taining an interest in the future and planning for the years
ahead, was positively associated with optimism. Interven-
tions utilizing CBT techniques have been consistently
effective among families of children with developmental
disabilities (Singer et al. 2007). It would be beneficial for
researchers to adapt, and implement, these established
intervention programs with families of children with ASD.
Although focusing on increasing optimism may be
effective in reducing distress and promoting positive out-
comes, the results of the present study suggest that opti-
mism alone is not the only factor to consider in this
equation. Given that increased social support is associated
with increased optimism, it seems important to increase
both the amount and quality of various informal, as well as
formal, social supports available to mothers. More specif-
ically, it seems likely that increases in social support that
provides helpful information along with other types of
instrumental and emotional assistance will increase opti-
mism and enhance maternal well-being. One possible
model that could be utilized in this population is the Par-
ent-to-Parent model (e.g. Singer et al. 1999). This is a
program designed to match parents of children with dis-
abilities with parent supporters (i.e. individuals who have
experience caring for children with disabilities). The sup-
porter provides emotional support and shares general
information with the parent. This model could be easily
implemented with parents of children with ASD. Indeed,
the regional autism support centers would be a logical
choice to provide parent supporters. Overall, there are
several intervention programs that could be implemented
with families of children with ASD that would focus on
J Autism Dev Disord (2010) 40:1274–1284
imparting the skills necessary to increase optimism as well
as increasing parent’s social support networks.
Although the current study provides important new
information about social support, optimism, and well-being
in mothers of children with ASD, there are several limi-
tations to the current study. First, because the sample
consisted of mainly Caucasian, upper-middle class fami-
lies, the generalizability of the results is limited. Second,
this study provides a static picture of the mothers at only a
single time point. Without longitudinal data, it is not pos-
sible to make stronger inferences about the relationships
between social supports, optimism, and maternal well-
being. For example, we are unable to determine whether
optimism influenced maternal outcomes or vice versa. A
longitudinal design would help in understanding how these
relationships change across time and which social supports
provide short-term or long-term benefits. Finally, the
present study also relied on maternal self-report for all
measures employed. Therefore, the issue of shared source
variance is a valid concern. Future research should include
both questionnaire and observational components.
In general, the present study expands upon previous
research by delineating the various mechanisms by which
social support influences maternal well-being and the role
maternal optimism plays in this process. Although the
current study is an important first step to untangling the
complex nature of the social support-psychological well-
being relationship among mothers of children with ASD,
there is still much to be studied in this area. For example,
future research might follow a family systems perspective
(Cox and Paley 1997), including both fathers and mothers
of children with ASD as well as other members of the
family, assessing their perceptions of support given and
received, and how congruence between family members or
lack thereof contributes to the well-being of each member.
Moreover, the relative and interactive contributions of
formal and informal supports need to be evaluated. For
example, it may be that formal supports help structure the
informal support system which promotes greater optimism
in the family and, in turn, greater well-being. Future
research might also examine more systematically how
other personality characteristics, such as locus of control,
engender or are engendered by various sources of social
support. Future studies also need to examine the conditions
under which social support mediates the optimism-psy-
chological well-being relationship versus those conditions
in which optimism mediates the social support-psycho-
logical well-being relationship. Longitudinal research
might also investigate whether the mediational relation-
ships change over time. Together, the results of the present
study, and the future research suggested, may provide a
useful framework for developing interventions tailored to
meet the needs of families of children with ASD.
1283
Acknowledgments This research was supported in part by an
NIMH training grant (2 T32 HD007184-28) and by the Institute for
Scholarship in the Liberal Arts at the University of Notre Dame. We
thank the various parent support groups for their help and support in
participant recruitment. We are also indebted to the families who gave
their time to participate in this research. We are indebted to Cindy
Bergeman and Anthony Ong for their help in the development of this
project.
References
Achat, H., Kawachi, I., Spiro, A., DeMolles, D. A., & Sparrow, D.
(2000). Optimism and depression as predictors of physical and
mental health functioning: The normative aging study. Annals of
Behavioral Medicine, 22, 127–130.
Aiken, L., & West, S. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and
interpreting interactions. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator
variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual,
strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 51, 1173–1182.
Benson, P. R. (2006). The impact of child symptom severity on
depressed mood among parents of children with ASD: The
mediating role of stress proliferation. Journal of Autism and
Developmental Disorders, 36, 685–695.
Bishop, S. L., Richler, J., Cain, A. C., & Lord, C. (2007). Predictors
of perceived negative impact in mothers of children with autism
spectrum disorder. American Journal on Mental Retardation,
112, 450–461.
Bonds, D. D., Gondoli, D. M., Sturge-Apple, M. L., & Salem, L. N.
(2002). Parenting stress as a mediator of the relation between
parenting support and optimal parenting. Parenting Science and
Practice, 2, 409–435.
Boyd, B. A. (2002). Examining the relationship between stress and
lack of social support in mothers of children with autism. Focus
on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 17, 208–215.
Brissette, I., Scheier, M. F., & Carver, C. S. (2002). The role of
optimism in social network development, coping, and psycho-
logical adjustment during a life transition. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 82, 102–111.
Bristol, M. M. (1984). Family resources and successful adaptation to
autistic children. In E. Schopler & G. B. Mesibov (Eds.), The
effects of autism on the family (pp. 290–308). New York: Plenum
Press.
Bromley, J., Hare, D. J., Davison, K., & Emerson, E. (2004). Mothers
supporting children with autism spectrum disorders—Social
support, mental health status and satisfaction with services.
Autism, 8, 409–423.
Cervone, D. (2004). The architecture of personality. Psychological
Review, 111, 183–204.
Cohen, S., & Wills, T. A. (1985). Stress, social support, and the
buffering hypothesis. Psychological Bulletin, 98, 310–357.
Conway, F., Magai, C., Springer, C., & Jones, S. C. (2008). Optimism
and pessimism as predictors of physical and psychological health
among grandmothers raising their grandchildren. Journal of
Research in Personality, 42, 1352–1357.
Cox, M. J., & Paley, B. (1997). Families as systems. Annual Review
of Psychology, 48, 243–267.
Coyne, J. C., Ellard, J. H., & Smith, D. A. F. (1990). Social support,
interdependence, and the dilemmas of helping. In B. R. Sarason,
I. G. Sarason, & G. R. Pierce (Eds.), Social support: An
interactional view (pp. 129–149). New York: Wiley.
Devins, G. M., Orme, C. M., Costello, C. G., Binik, Y. M., Frizzell,
B., Stam, H. J., et al. (1988). Measuring depressive symptoms in
123
1284
illness populations: Psychometric properties of the center for
epidemiologic studies depression (CES-D) scale. Psychology
and Health, 2, 139–156.
Dougall, A. L., Hyman, K. B., Hayward, M. C., McFeeley, S., &
Baum, A. (2001). Optimism and traumatic stress: The impor-
tance of social support and coping. Journal of Applied Social
Psychology, 31, 223–245.
Dunn, M. E., Burbine, T., Bowers, C. A., & Tantleff-Dunn, S. (2001).
Moderators of stress in parents of children with autism.
Community Mental Health Journal, 37, 39–52.
Ekas, N. V., Whitman, T. L., & Shivers, C. (2009). Religiosity,
spirituality, and socioemotional functioning in mothers of
children with autism spectrum disorder. Journal of Autism and
Developmental Disorders, 39, 706–719.
Gill, M. J., & Harris, S. L. (1991). Hardiness and social support as
predictors of psychological discomfort in mothers of children
with autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders,
21, 407–416.
Greenberg, J. S., Seltzer, M. M., Krauss, M. W., Chou, R. J., & Hong,
J. (2004). The effect of quality of the relationship between
mothers and adult children with schizophrenia, autism, or down
syndrome on maternal well-being: The mediating role of
optimism. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 74, 14–25.
Hassall, R., Rose, J., & McDonald, J. (2005). Parenting stress in
mothers of children with an intellectual disability: The effects of
parental cognitions in relation to child characteristics and family
support. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 49,
405–418.
Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in
covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new
alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1–55.
Julien, D., & Markman, H. J. (1991). Social support and social
networks as determinants of individual and marital outcomes.
Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 8, 549–568.
Karademas, E. C. (2006). Self-efficacy, social support and well-being:
The mediating role of optimism. Personality and Individual
Differences, 40, 1281–1290.
MacKinnon, D. P. (2008). Introduction to statistical mediation
analysis. New York, NY: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
MacKinnon, D. P., Lockwood, C. M., Hoffman, J. M., West, S. G., &
Sheets, V. (2002). A comparison of methods to test mediation
and other intervening variable effects. Psychological Methods, 7,
83–104.
MacKinnon, D. P., Lockwood, C. M., & Williams, J. (2004).
Confidence limits for the indirect effect: Distribution of the
product and resampling methods. Multivariate Behavioral
Research, 39, 99–128.
Matthews, E. E., & Cook, P. F. (2009). Relationships among
optimism, well-being, self-transcendence, coping, and social
support in women during treatment for breast cancer. Psycho-
Oncology, 18, 716–726.
Olsson, M. B., & Hwang, C. P. (2001). Depression in mothers and
fathers of children with intellectual disability. Journal of
Intellectual Disability Research, 45, 535–545.
Park, C. L., & Folkman, S. (1997). Meaning in the context of stress
and coping. Review of General Psychology, 1, 115–144.
Pavot, W., & Diener, E. (1993). Review of the satisfaction with life
scale. Psychological Assessment, 5, 164–172.
Pearlin, L. I., & Schooler, C. (1978). The structure of coping. Journal
of Health and Social Behavior, 19, 2–21.
Pretzer, J. L., & Walsh, C. A. (2001). Optimism, pessimism, and
psychotherapy: Implications for clinical practice. In E. C. Chang
(Ed.), Optimism and pessimism, implications for theory,
research, and practice (pp. 321–346). Washington, DC: Amer-
ican Psychological Association.
123
J Autism Dev Disord (2010) 40:1274–1284
Radloff, L. S. (1977). The CES-D scale: A self report depression scale
for research in the general population. Applied Psychological
Measurement, 1, 385–401.
Rini, C., DuHamel, K., Ostroff, J., Boulad, F., Martini, R., Mee, L.,
et al. (2008). Social support from family and friends as a buffer
of low spousal support among mothers of critically ill children:
A multilevel modeling approach. Health Psychology, 27,
593–603.
Ryff, C. D., & Keyes, C. L. M. (1995). The structure of psychological
well-being revisited. Journal of Personality and Social Psychol-
ogy, 69, 719–727.
Scheier, M. F., & Carver, C. S. (1985). Optimism, coping, and health:
Assessment and implications of generalized outcome expectan-
cies. Health Psychology, 4, 219–247.
Scheier, M. F., & Carver, C. S. (1992). Effects of optimism on
psychological and physical well-being: Theoretical overview and
empirical update. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 16, 201–228.
Scheier, M. F., Matthews, K. A., Owens, J., Magovern, G. J.,
Lefebvre, R. C., Abbott, R. A., et al. (1989). Optimism and
recovery from coronary artery bypass surgery: The beneficial
effects on physical and psychological well-being. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 1024–1040.
Schuster, T. L., Kessler, R. C., & Aseltine, R. H. (1990). Supportive
interactions, negative interactions, and depressive mood. Amer-
ican Journal of Community Psychology, 18, 423–438.
Segerstrom, S. C., Taylor, S. E., Kemeny, M. E., & Fahey, J. L.
(1998). Optimism is associated with mood, coping, and immune
change in response to stress. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 74, 1646–1655.
Shelby, R. A., Crespin, T. R., Wells-Di Gregorio, S. M., Lamdan, R.
M., Siegel, J. E., & Taylor, K. L. (2008). Optimism, social
support, and adjustment in African American women with breast
cancer. Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 31, 433–444.
Shrout, P. E., & Bolger, N. (2002). Mediation in experimental and
nonexperimental studies: New procedures and recommendations.
Psychological Methods, 7, 422–445.
Singer, G. H. S., Ethridge, B. L., & Aldana, S. I. (2007). Primary and
secondary effects of parenting and stress management interven-
tions for parents of children with developmental disabilities: A
meta-analysis. Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabil-
ities Research Reviews, 13, 357–369.
Singer, G. H. S., Marquis, J., Powers, L. K., Blanchard, L., Divenere,
N., Santelli, B., et al. (1999). A multi-site evaluation of parent to
parent programs for parents of children with disabilities. Journal
of Early Intervention, 22, 217–229.
Trunzo, J. J., & Pinto, B. M. (2003). Social support as a mediator of
optimism and distress in breast cancer survivors. Journal of
Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 71, 805–811.
Watson, D., Clark, L. A., & Tellegen, A. (1988). Development and
validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The
PANAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
54, 1063–1070.
Weiss, S. (2002). Hardiness and social support as predictors of stress
in mothers of typical children, children with autism, and children
with mental retardation. Autism, 6, 115–130.
Whalen, H. R., & Lachman, M. E. (2000). Social support and strain
from partner, family and friends: Costs and benefits for men and
women in adulthood. Journal of Social and Personal Relation-
ships, 17, 5–30.
Whitman, T. L. (2004). The development of autism: A self-regulatory
perspective. London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers.
Zautra, A. J., Smith, B., Affleck, G., & Tennen, H. (2001).
Examination of chronic pain and affect relationships: Applica-
tions of a dynamic model of affect. Journal of Counseling and
Clinical Psychology, 69, 786–795.