The New Beginnings Podcast: Brief Audio Intervention for Parents From Divorced and Separated Families (NBP-P)

"The New Beginnings Podcast: A Small-scale Randomized Controlled Trial of a Parenting Podcast to Improve Outcomes for Children From Divorced Families"

The goal of this study is to learn if the New Beginnings Podcast can help children whose parents are going through a divorce or separation. The podcast shares parenting strategies that have been shown to help in past in-person and online programs. This study will also look at how easy it is for parents to use the podcast and how helpful they find it.

The main questions it aims to answer are:

1. Do parents find the podcast easy to use, helpful, and relevant?
2. Does listening to the podcast improve children's mental health?
3. Does the podcast help parents build stronger relationships with their children and reduce conflict between parents?

Researchers will compare families who use the podcast to families on a waitlist to see if the podcast makes a difference.

Participants will:

1. Listen to podcast episodes over the course of the study
2. Answer questions about their experiences with the podcast
3. Complete surveys about their child's well-being, their parenting, and family relationships

This study will include 80 parents and their children.

Study Overview

• Status: Recruiting
• Conditions: Feasibility Study; Acceptability; Interparental Conflict; Child Mental Health; Parent Child Relationship; Parenting Intervention; Parenting Behaviour; Appropriateness
• Intervention / Treatment: Behavioral: New Beginnings Podcast Program; Other: No Interventions

Detailed Description

The adult (parent) participants who are enrolled in the randomized clinical trial will receive a podcast-based program that teaches several parenting skills that have demonstrated efficacy and effectiveness for improving child adjustment after divorce in the short- and long- term in previous randomized trials. The anticipated risks are considered minimal and reasonable in relation to the anticipated benefit of an intervention tailored to help after separation/divorce.

The child participants (aged 11-18, offspring of parent participants) will receive no direct benefits of participation but may receive indirect benefits from the proposed research through podcast-induced improvements in their parent's parenting (as described above).

• Study Type: Interventional
• Enrollment (Estimated): 80
• Phase: Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

• Study Contact: Name: Charla A Rhodes, Ph.D., Clinical Psychology; Phone Number: ‪(602) 767-2426‬; Email: carhode1@asu.edu

Study Locations

• United States
  • Arizona
    • Tempe, Arizona, United States, 85281
      • Recruiting
      • ASU Dept of Psychology
      • Contact: Charla Rhodes, PhD; Phone Number: +44 797 685001; Email: aubrey.rhodes@kcl.ac.uk

Participation Criteria

Eligibility Criteria

• Ages Eligible for Study: Child; Adult; Older Adult
• Accepts Healthy Volunteers: No

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

For Parents, eligibility criteria are:

1. divorced, separated, separated but never married, or divorcing/separating within the last two years;
2. one or more children between the ages of 8-18 years old;
3. have in-person contact with their child(ren) at least three hours per week or have at least one overnight visit every other week;
4. have access to a smartphone with internet that can play audio files;
5. English speaking.

For children, eligibility criteria are:

1. have a parent who is participating in the trial;
2. be between the ages of 8-18 and
3. have access to a computer to complete assessments. If a parent has more than one child aged 8-18 interested in participating, we will randomly select one child to ensure independence of responses.

Exclusion Criteria:

-

Study Plan

How is the study designed?

Design Details

• Primary Purpose: Prevention
• Allocation: Randomized
• Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
• Masking: Single

Number of Arms

2

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm	Intervention / Treatment
Experimental: Podcast Program (Intervention Group); Parents in the intervention arm will receive access to five podcast episodes based on the original New Beginnings Program. The episodes teach core parenting skills designed to improve parent-child relationship quality, enhance communication, and reduce children's exposure to interparental conflict. Each episode includes both didactic instruction and audio demonstrations of parent-child interactions. Parents are encouraged to listen to one episode per week. Listening activity is tracked, but parents do not receive financial incentives for completing episodes. Episodes range from 10 to 25 minutes in length, and parents are encouraged to adjust the playback speed as needed to suit their preferences.	Behavioral: New Beginnings Podcast Program; Parents will listen to 5 episodes of the New Beginnings Podcast (NBP-P) over 5 weeks. They will listen to one episode per week.; Other Names: NBP; NBP-P; New Beginnings Podcast; New Beginning Program
Experimental: Waitlist (Control Group); Waitlist (Control Group): Seven weeks after the initial survey, parents will complete a post-test survey. Upon completion of the post-test survey or withdrawal from the study, all podcast episodes will be made available to the parent.	Other: No Interventions; Parents in the waitlist group will get access to the podcast after completion of the post-test survey or withdrawal from the study.; Other Names: No Intervention; Waitlist; Waitlist Control

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure	Measure Description	Time Frame
Feasibility of Intervention	Feasibility of Intervention Measure (FIM) The FIM assesses the extent to which an intervention can be successfully used or carried out in a given context or setting (Weiner et al., 2017). It includes 4 items rated on a 5-point Likert scale (1=Completely disagree to 5=Completely agree). Item responses are averaged (range 1-5); higher scores indicate greater perceived feasibility. Psychometric evaluation shows acceptable reliability and validity alongside AIM and IAM.	Collected at Post-test only (Week 7) for Intervention Group Only
Usability of Intervention	Intervention Usability Scale (IUS) Usability of the intervention will be assessed using the Intervention Usability Scale (IUS), a 10-item self-report questionnaire adapted from the System Usability Scale (SUS). Items are rated on a 5-point scale ranging from 0 to 4, with response options reflecting increasing agreement. Item scores span the full possible range (0-4). Item responses are averaged to compute a mean usability score (range 0-4), with higher scores indicating greater perceived usability. Emerging psychometrics support a two-factor structure ("Usable" and "Learnable") alongside a reliable total score (Lyon et al., 2021).	Collected at Post-test only (Week 7) for Intervention Group only
Acceptability of Intervention	Acceptability of Intervention Measure (AIM) The AIM assesses perceived acceptability of an intervention among intended users/implementers (Weiner et al., 2017). It contains 4 items rated on a 5-point Likert scale (1=Completely disagree to 5=Completely agree). Scores are typically averaged (range 1-5), with higher values indicating greater acceptability. Initial development and testing demonstrated strong content validity, structural validity, reliability, known-groups validity, and responsiveness	Collected at Post-test only (Week 7) for Intervention Group only
Appropriateness of Intervention	Intervention Appropriateness Measure (IAM) The IAM assesses perceived appropriateness or fit of an intervention for a given setting, provider role, or target population (Weiner et al., 2017). It includes 4 items rated on a 5-point Likert scale (1=Completely disagree to 5=Completely agree). Item responses are averaged to produce a 1-5 score; higher values indicate the intervention is viewed as a better fit. Development work shows sound psychometric properties consistent with AIM and FIM.	Collected at Post-test only (Week 7) for Intervention Group only

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure	Measure Description	Time Frame
Child Internalizing Symptoms (Child-Report)	Child internalizing asymptoms will be assessed using BPM-Y, the youth self-report version of the Brief Problem Monitor (a 19-item short form derived from the CBCL/YSR). Subscales for Internalizing problems will be scored by summing responses to relevant items (0 = "not true," 1 = "somewhat true," 2 = "very true"), with higher totals indicating greater symptom severity. The BPM-Y is intended for youth (typically ages 11 and above) and provides a rapid, validated self-report of internalizing and externalizing behavior (Achenbach et al., 2011; Piper et al., 2014).	Baseline (Week 0) and Post-Test (Week 7)
Child Internalizing Symptoms (Parent-Report)	Child internalizing symptoms will be assessed using the Brief Problem Monitor (BPM), a 19-item validated short-form version of the Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL) using parent-report. I The BPM parent-report yields an internalizing subscale scores based on responses (0 = "not true," 1 = "somewhat true," 2 = "very true") summed across relevant items. Higher scores reflect greater symptom severity.	Baseline (Week 0) and Post-Test (Week 7)
Child Externalizing Symptoms (Parent-Report)	Child externalizing symptoms will be assessed using the Brief Problem Monitor (BPM), a 19-item validated short-form version of the Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL) using parent-report. The BPM parent-report yields an externalizing subscale scores based on responses (0 = "not true," 1 = "somewhat true," 2 = "very true") summed across relevant items. Higher scores reflect greater symptom severity.	Baseline (Week 0) and Post-Test (Week 7)
Child Externalizing Problems (Child-Report)	Child externalizing asymptoms will be assessed using BPM-Y, the youth self-report version of the Brief Problem Monitor (a 19-item short form derived from the CBCL/YSR). Subscales for externalizing problems will be scored by summing responses to relevant items (0 = "not true," 1 = "somewhat true," 2 = "very true"), with higher totals indicating greater symptom severity. The BPM-Y is intended for youth (typically ages 11 and above) and provides a rapid, validated self-report of internalizing and externalizing behavior (Achenbach et al., 2011; Piper et al., 2014).	Baseline (Week 0) and Post-Test (Week 7)

Other Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure	Measure Description	Time Frame
Children's Perception of Interparental Conflict (Parent-Report)	Interparental conflict as perceived by the child (via parent informant) will be measured using the Children's Perception of Interparental Conflict Scale (CPIC). Perception of frequency and intensity of interparental conflict is assessed using the 6-item frequency and 7-item intensity subscales of the Children's Perception of Interparental Conflict scale (CPIC; (Grych et al., 1992). The CPIC is rated on a 3-point scale (1 = true, 2=sort of true, 3 = false) and scored as average rating, with higher scores indicating higher levels of perceived interparental conflict.The CPIC has well-established psychometric properties.	Baseline (Week 0) and Post-Test (Week 7)
Parent-Adolescent Communication (Parent-Report)	Thee quality of parent-child communication (parent's perspective) will be assessed using the Parent-Adolescent Communication Scale (PACS). PACS is a 10-item self-report measure in which respondents rate statements on a 5-point Likert scale (Disagree a lot to Agree a Lot) reflecting how well items describe communication openness and communication problems (e.g., discussing beliefs, avoiding difficult topics). Higher scores indicate more positive communication. The PACS has been widely used in adolescent and family research and demonstrates acceptable reliability and validity across diverse populations (Barnes & Olson, 1982; see also systematic reviews of parent-child communication scales).	Baseline (Week 0) and Post-Test (Week 7)
Parenting Self-Efficacy (Parent-Report)	Parenting self-perceptions will be evaluated by the Me as a Parent - Short Form (MaaP-SF). The MaaP-SF is a brief 4-item instrument assessing parents' confidence, sense of doing a good job, perceived competence, and regulatory self-efficacy in parenting. Responses are given on a Likert scale from 1 to 5 (i.e., strongly disagree to strongly agree) and summed. Higher scores reflect greater parenting self-efficacy and reflective capacity. The measure is derived from a validated full form and has been used in parent outcome research, showing acceptable internal consistency and construct validity (Matthews et al., 2022).	Baseline (Week 0) and Post-Test (Week 7)
Parental Warmth / Acceptance (Parent-Report)	Parent's perceptions of parental warmth and positive regard will be assessed via the Acceptance subscale of the Children's Report of Parental Behavior Inventory (CRPBI; 16 items), parent-report version. Parents rate statements on a 5-point Likert scale from 1 (almost never) to 5 (almost always). Items are averaged. Higher scores indicate greater perceived acceptance, warmth, and involvement from the parent. The CRPBI has long been used to gauge positive parenting dimensions, and its acceptance-rejection dimension is one of the most replicated parenting factors (King et al., 2023; Rodriguez et al., 2024).	Baseline (Week 0) and Post-Test (Week 7)
Parental Rejection (Parent-Report)	Parent's perceptions of rejection will be assessed via the Rejection subscale of the Children's Report of Parental Behavior Inventory (CRPBI; 16 items), parent-report version. Parents rate statements on a 5-point Likert scale from 1 (almost never) to 5 (almost always). Items are averaged. Higher scores reflect more perceived rejection, hostility, or detachment. The rejection dimension oppositely complements the acceptance dimension and is well established in the literature on perceived negative parenting (Schaefer, 1965; Rodriguez et al., 2024).	Baseline (Week 0) and Post-Test (Week 7)
Caught in the Middle (Child-Report)	The extent to which the child feels "caught in the middle" between caregivers will be measured via the Caught in the Middle (CIM; 7 items) scale (child report only). The CIM asks children how often or strongly they feel they are drawn into parental disputes, forced to choose sides, or mediating conflict. Responses are rated on a 1 (Never) to 4 (Very Often) and averaged. Higher scores reflect greater triangulation or children's perceived involvement in parental conflict. The CIM has been used to gauge child perceptions of boundary crossing in interparental conflict (O'Hara et al., 2019) and is grounded in the cognitive-contextual framework of children's conflict appraisals (Grych & Fincham, 1992).	Baseline (Week 0) and Post-Test (Week 7)
Children's Perception of Interparental Conflict (Child-Report)	Interparental conflict as perceived by the child self-report will be measured using the Children's Perception of Interparental Conflict Scale (CPIC). Perception of frequency and intensity of interparental conflict is assessed using the 6-item frequency and 7-item intensity subscales of the Children's Perception of Interparental Conflict scale (CPIC; (Grych et al., 1992). The CPIC is rated on a 3-point scale (1 = true, 3 = false) and scored as an average rating. Higher scores indicate more frequent or intense perceived conflict and more negative emotional/appraisal responses (Grych et al., 1992; Moura et al., 2010).	Baseline (Week 0) and Post-Test (Week 7)
Parental Acceptance/Warmth (Child-Report)	Children's perceptions of parental warmth and positive regard will be assessed via the Acceptance subscale of the Children's Report of Parental Behavior Inventory (CRPBI; 16 items), self-report version. Children rate statements on a 5-point Likert scale from 1 (almost never) to 5 (almost always). Higher scores indicate greater perceived acceptance, warmth, and involvement from the parent. The CRPBI has long been used to gauge positive parenting dimensions, and its acceptance-rejection dimension is one of the most replicated parenting factors (King et al., 2023; Rodriguez et al., 2024).	Baseline (Week 0) and Post-Test (Week 7)
Parental Rejection (Child-Report)	Children's perceptions of parental rejection will be assessed via the Rejection subscale of the Children's Report of Parental Behavior Inventory (CRPBI; 16 items), self-report version for ages 11 and older. Children rate statements on a 5-point Likert scale from 1 (almost never) to 5 (almost always). Higher scores reflect more perceived rejection, hostility, or detachment. The rejection dimension oppositely complements the acceptance dimension and is well established in the literature on perceived negative parenting (Schaefer, 1965; Rodriguez et al., 2024).	Baseline (Week 0) and Post-Test (Week 7)

Collaborators and Investigators

• Sponsor: Charla Aubrey Rhodes

Publications and helpful links

General Publications

• Wolchik SA, Sandler IN, Winslow EB, Porter MM, Yun-Tein J. Effects of an asynchronous, fully web-based parenting-after-divorce program to reduce interparental conflict, increase quality of parenting and reduce children's post-divorce behavior problems. Fam Court Rev. Published online 2022.
• Wolchik SA, Sandler IN, Weiss L, Winslow E. New Beginnings: An empirically-based program to help divorced mothers promote resilience in their children. In: Briesmeister JM, Schaefer CE, eds. Handbook of Parent Training: Helping Parents Prevent and Solve Problem Behaviors. John Wiley & Sons Inc.; 2007:25-62.

Helpful Links

• Link to recruitment Website

Study record dates

Study Major Dates

• Study Start (Actual): August 15, 2025
• Primary Completion (Estimated): December 1, 2026
• Study Completion (Estimated): December 1, 2026

Study Registration Dates

• First Submitted: August 15, 2025
• First Submitted That Met QC Criteria: April 10, 2026
• First Posted (Actual): April 14, 2026

Study Record Updates

• Last Update Posted (Actual): April 14, 2026
• Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria: April 10, 2026
• Last Verified: August 1, 2025

More Information

Terms related to this study

• Keywords: Podcast; Prevention; Parenting; Child Mental Health; Divorce; Parenting Intervention; Separation; Separated and Divorced Parents; New Beginnings Program
• Additional Relevant MeSH Terms: Organization and Administration; Health Services Administration; Appointments and Schedules; Waiting Lists
• Other Study ID Numbers: STUDY00017352

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

• Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?: YES
• IPD Plan Description: De-identified individual participant data (IPD) that support the findings of the published results will be shared. This includes outcome measures, group assignment, and any other variables used in analyses. Demographic or other identifying information not used in analyses will be excluded to protect participant confidentiality. Analysis code and statistical scripts will be shared alongside published manuscripts.
• IPD Sharing Time Frame: The IPD and supporting information will be made available at the time of publication and will remain publicly available indefinitely on OSF.
• IPD Sharing Access Criteria: All interested researchers will have unrestricted public access to the de-identified dataset, statistical analysis code, and supporting documentation via the Open Science Framework (OSF). Materials will be hosted on a publicly accessible OSF project page linked in all related publications.
• IPD Sharing Supporting Information Type: STUDY_PROTOCOL; SAP; ICF; ANALYTIC_CODE

Drug and device information, study documents

• Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product: No
• Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product: No