Download - Authoritative and Authoritarian Parenting Practices and Social and School Performance in Chinese Children

http://jbd.sagepub.com/Behavioral DevelopmentInternational Journal of

http://jbd.sagepub.com/content/21/4/855The online version of this article can be found at:

DOI: 10.1080/016502597384703

1997 21: 855International Journal of Behavioral DevelopmentXinyin Chen, Qi Dong and Hong Zhou

Social and School Performance in Chinese ChildrenAuthoritative and Authoritarian Parenting Practices and

Published by:

http://www.sagepublications.com

On behalf of:

International Society for the Study of Behavioral Development

can be found at:DevelopmentInternational Journal of BehavioralAdditional services and information for

http://jbd.sagepub.com/cgi/alertsEmail Alerts:

http://jbd.sagepub.com/subscriptionsSubscriptions:

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navReprints:

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.navPermissions:

http://jbd.sagepub.com/content/21/4/855.refs.htmlCitations: at UNIVERSITE LAVAL on July 9, 2014jbd.sagepub.comDownloaded from at UNIVERSITE LAVAL on July 9, 2014jbd.sagepub.comDownloaded from

http://jbd.sagepub.com/

http://jbd.sagepub.com/content/21/4/855

http://www.sagepublications.com

http://www.issbd.org

http://jbd.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts

http://jbd.sagepub.com/subscriptions

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav

http://jbd.sagepub.com/content/21/4/855.refs.html



What is This?

- Dec 1, 1997Version of Record >>

at UNIVERSITE LAVAL on July 9, 2014jbd.sagepub.comDownloaded from at UNIVERSITE LAVAL on July 9, 2014jbd.sagepub.comDownloaded from

http://jbd.sagepub.com/content/21/4/855.full.pdf

http://online.sagepub.com/site/sphelp/vorhelp.xhtml



INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF BEHAVIORAL DEVELOPMENT, 1997, 21

(4), 855–873

Requests for reprints should be sent to Xinyin Chen, Department of Psychology, Universityof Western Ontario, London, Ontario, Canada N6A 5C2.

This research was supported by a grant from the Social Sciences and Humanities ResearchCouncil of Canada and a grant from the State Education Commission of P.R. China. We wouldlike to thank Yong Chen, Haoli Xin, and Yan Zhou, who aided in the collection, coding andentry of data, and those children and their parents in Beijing, P.R. China, who participated inthis study.

q 1997 The International Society for the Study of Behavioural Development

Authoritative and Authoritarian Parenting Practicesand Social and School Performance in Chinese

ChildrenXinyin Chen

University of Western Ontario, Canada

Qi Dong and Hong ZhouBeijing Normal University, People’s Republic of China

The purpose of the study was to examine the relations between authoritativeand authoritarian parenting styles and social and school adjustment in Chinesechildren. A sample of second grade children, aged eight years, and theirparents in Beijing, People’s Republic of China, participated in this study. Thechildren were group administered a peer assessment measure of socialbehaviour and a sociometric nomination measure. Teachers completed arating scale on school-related social competence and problems for each child.Data concerning child-rearing practices were obtained from parents. Inaddition, information on children’s academic and social competence wasobtained from school records. It was found that authoritarian parenting wasassociated positively with aggression and negatively with peer acceptance ,sociability-co mpetence, distinguished studentship and school academicachievement. In contrast, parental authoritative style was associated positivelywith indices of social and school adjustment and negatively with adjustmentproblems. The results indicated that, inconsistent with the argument in theliterature (e.g. Steinberg, Dornbusch, & Brown, 1992), authoritative andauthoritarian parenting practices were relevant to social and academicperformance in Chinese children.

One of the most in�uential conceptual analyses on parenting is Baumrind’ssystematic discussion on the effects of parental affect and control on the

at UNIVERSITE LAVAL on July 9, 2014jbd.sagepub.comDownloaded from


856 CHEN, DONG, ZHOU

child (1967, 1971). According to Baumrind, authoritative parenting,consisting of parental responsive attitudes and adequate control, optimallyfacilitates the development of child competent behaviour. This parentingstyle is typically re�ected by parents’ frequent employment of inductive andsupportive techniques in child rearing. It has been found in the West thatinductive reasoning and rational guidance predict children’s prosocial andadaptive behaviour (Baumrind, 1971, 1991; Dekovic & Janssens, 1992;Dornbusch, Ritter, Leiderman, Roberts, & Fraleigh, 1987; Zahn-Waxler,Radke-Yarrow, & King, 1979). This may be because, when parents aresensitive to the child’s needs and abilities and parental expectations andrequests are reasonable and appropriate for the child, he/she is likely toaccept and follow parents’ suggestions and advice. In addition, authoritativeparents’ nurturant and rational behaviour may serve as a model for the child(Bandura, 1977).

In contrast, authoritarian parents are controlling and rejecting of thechild; they tend to use power-assertive, prohibitive, and punitive strategiesand emphasise absolute obedience of the child. Because prohibition andpower assertion are likely to be related to anxiety, fear, and frustration inchildren, it is not dif�cult to understand that children of authoritarianparents tend to be self-oriented and to have low self-esteem and negativeattitudes towards the world (e.g. Coopersmith, 1967; Lempers, Clark-Lempers, & Simons, 1989; Weiss, Dodge, Bates, & Pettit, 1992), which, inturn, may contribute to the development of deviant behaviours andadjustment problems (e.g. Eisenberg & Murphy, 1995; Hart, DeWolf,Wozniak, & Burt, 1992; Lamborn, Mounts, Steinberg, & Dornbusch, 1991).

Although the role of parental behaviour may be appreciated in mostsocieties (Harkness & Super, 1995; Whiting & Edward, 1988), it remains tobe examined whether the Western-based conceptualisation of parentingbehaviour, such as authoritarian and authoritative practices, can begeneralised to other cultures. For example, several researchers have recentlyargued that parental authoritativeness and authoritarianism in Chineseculture may have the meanings that are different from those typically foundin Western cultures (Darling & Steinberg, 1993; Ekblad, 1986; Steinberg etal., 1992; Wu, 1981). According to this argument, although controlling andauthoritarian strategies have been found to be associated with childbehavioural and adjustment problems in Western children (e.g. Dornbuschet al., 1987), it may be positively valued in the hierarchical collectivisticChinese society and thus associated with adaptive outcomes in Chinesechildren (e.g. Chiu, 1987; Ekblad, 1986). As an evidence for this argument, ithas been found consistently that Chinese parents are more controlling andauthoritarian and less authoritative than North American parents (Chao,1994; Dombusch et al., 1987; Ho, 1986; Kelley, 1992; Lin & Fu, 1990).However, Chinese children have been found to perform better than their



PARENTING PRACTICES AND SCHOOL PERFORMANCE 857

North American counterparts on academic achievement (e.g. Dornbusch etal., 1987; Stevenson et al., 1990). Nevertheless, there has been little empiricalresearch extant that directly examines the links between parentalauthoritarian and authoritative styles and child adjustment in Chineseculture.

The purpose of the present study was to examine the relations betweenauthoritative and authoritarian parenting practices and social adjustmentand academic achievement in Chinese children. To avoid potentialconfounding factors that might be involved in the use of immigrant Chinesesamples in Western countries (e.g. Dornbusch et al., 1987), such as mixedcultural in�uences and stress in adjustment to the new environment, asample of elementary school children in Beijing, the People’s Republic ofChina, was selected for the study. Information on child-rearing practices,children’s academic achievement and learning problems, peer acceptanceand rejection, and social functioning was obtained from parents, teachers,peers, and school administrative records.

It may be true that, due to the emphasis on parental authority and thechild’s obedience in traditional Chinese culture, Chinese parents are highlycontrolling and authoritarian, compared with Western parents (Dornbuschet al., 1987; Kelley, 1992; Lin & Fu, 1990). However, it may be misleading tosuggest that parental authoritarianism has positive effects on socialadjustment and academic achievement in Chinese children. In fact, parentsin China are often encouraged to be controlling based on affectionateattitudes towards the child. What is really valued in Chinese culture isparental care, involvement, supervision, and encouragement ofachievement (e.g. Chen, in press; Chen & Kaspar, in press; Ho, 1986). Anideal parent, particularly the mother, is often described as kindhearted andstrict (ci-xiang and yan-ge in Mandarin), which is similar to authoritative,rather than authoritarian, approach. It may be true that authoritarian,power-assertive parenting is necessary, and thus adaptive, in dangeroussocieties or communities where violence and the risks of antisocial activitiesare relatively commonplace (Garcia Coll, Meyer, & Brillon, 1995; Kelley,Power, & Wimbush, 1992), particularly from a short-term perspective.However, this is clearly not the case in China.

Thus, regardless of cross-cultural differences between Chinese and NorthAmerican parents in the average levels of authoritativeness andauthoritarianism, we argue that the adaptational meanings of theseparenting styles are similar to those typically found in the Western literature(e.g. Baumrind, 1971; Maccoby & Martin, 1983). Speci�cally, given thatcoercive, power-assertive, and prohibitive strategies may lead to the child’snegative emotional and behavioural reactions such as fear, frustration andanger, we believe that authoritarian parenting may be associated withmaladaptive social and academic development in Chinese children. In




contrast, as authoritative parenting provides explanation, guidance, andcommunication of affect, it may be associated with the child’s feelings ofcon�dence and security in the exploration of the world and positiveparent-child relationships, which, in turn, may be associated with children’ssocial and scholastic competence. It is important to note that thesearguments are not in contradiction with the �ndings on diverse culture-speci�c forms and processes of parenting such as when and how parents carefor children in China and other societies (see Bornstein, 1991, 1995; Chen &Kaspar, in press, for comprehensive reviews; Whiting & Edwards, 1988).

It has been found that both academic achievement and the quality of peerrelationships are signi�cant indices of school adjustment in Chinese andWestern children (Chen, in press; Chen, Rubin, & Sun, 1992, Coie, Dodge, &Kupersmidt, 1990; Stevenson et al., 1990). Children who have academicdif�culties are likely to experience psychological problems such as negativeself-perceptions of general self-worth and depression (Chen, Rubin, & Li,1995a, Fauber, Forehand, Long, Burke, & Faust, 1987; Kellam, Brown,Rubin, & Ensminger, 1983). Similarly, children who have dif�culties in peeracceptance may be “at risk” for maladaptive development such as schooldrop-out, delinquency, and psychopathology (Chen et al., 1995a, Chen,Rubin, & Li, 1995b; Coie et al., 1990; Parker & Asher, 1987). Based on ourspeculations described earlier, we hypothesised that, inconsistent with theprevious arguments concerning Chinese parenting practices (e.g. Ekblad,1986; Steinberg et al., 1992), authoritative parenting style would bepositively associated with school academic achievement and social status. Incontrast, authoritarian parenting would be related to school dif�culties andpeer rejection.

Recent research on children’s social functioning has mainly focused onsociability, aggression-disruption, and shyness-inhibition (e.g. Morison, &Masten, 1991). Consistent with the Western results (e.g. Coie et al., 1990),sociable-prosocial behaviour has been found to be associated with peeracceptance, leadership and academic achievement, whereas aggressive-disruptive behaviour is associated with and predictive of adjustmentproblems including peer rejection and academic dif�culties in Chinesechildren (Chen et al., 1992, 1995b). Inconsistent with the Western literature(e.g. Rubin & Asendorpf, 1993) in which shy-inhibited behaviour has beenconsidered socially incompetent, immature, and maladaptive, shyness-socialinhibition is positively evaluated, re�ecting social maturity andunderstanding in Chinese culture (King & Bond, 1985); shy-sensitivechildren are accepted by peers and adjust well to the environment in China(Chen et al., 1992, 1995b). Therefore, we hypothesised that authoritativeparenting would be associated positively with sociable-prosocial behaviourand shy-inhibited behaviour and negatively with aggression-disruption. Wefurther hypothesised that authoritarian parenting would be associated




positively with aggression and negatively with sociability and shyness-inhibition.

Finally, it has been found that fathers and mothers may play differentroles in child rearing (e.g. Belsky, Gilstrap, & Rovine, 1984; Parke, 1995).Thus, we examined the relations between parenting practices and childfunctioning separately for mothers and fathers. In addition, because theliterature has indicated that the impact of socialisation practices on socialand school performance may differ for boys and girls (e.g. Crouter, Manke,& McHale, 1995; Hart et al., 1992), the moderating effects of gender on therelations between parenting and child performance were also examined inthis study.

METHOD

Participants

A total of 304 second-grade children (161 males and 143 females) attendingtwo elementary schools that were randomly selected in Beijing, People’sRepublic of China, participated in the study. The mean age of the childrenwas 7 years, 11 months (SD 5 8 months). Complete data concerningchild-rearing practices and family background were obtained from 263mothers and 249 fathers.

The children were from two kinds of families: (a) 63% of the children werefrom families in which parents were ordinary workers; most of these parentshad an educational level of high school or below; (b) 37% of the childrenwere from professional families in which one or both parents were teachers,doctors, engineers, or of�cials; their educational levels ranged from highschool to university graduate. Due to the “one-child-per-family policy” thatwas implemented in the late 1970s, almost all children in China, particularlyin urban areas, are “only” children. This has become an important feature offamily and social conditions in China and thus represents an integral part ofthe sociocultural background. Consistently, 97% of the children had nosiblings in our sample. Thirty-four percent of children lived in a family whichconsisted of three generations: grandparents, parents, and the child; and66% of children were from nuclear families in which only parents and thechild lived together. Finally, 96% of the children lived with both parents.About 2.5% of children had a single parent (usually mother) due to divorceor separation and the rest of the children lived with a single parent due toparental death or other events. These demographic data were virtuallyidentical to those reported by the China State Statistics Bureau concerningurban population in China in 1990s (The People’s Daily, 12 October1994). Thus, the sample was representative of school-aged children in urbanChina.




Procedure

The children were group administered a peer assessment measure of socialbehaviour (The Revised Class Play; Masten, Morison, & Pelligrini, 1985)and a sociometric nomination measure. Teachers completed a measureconcerning children’s school-related competence and problems (TheTeacher Child Rating Scale; Hightower et al., 1986). Parents of the childrenin each class were invited to come to the school and requested to complete aset of “Parental Questionnaires”. The questionnaires included a measure ofchild-rearing practices and a survey of background information. Finally,information on children’s social achievement and academic achievement inChinese and mathematics was obtained from school administrative records.The administration of all measures was carried out in May 1994, by a groupof university teachers and graduate students in psychology, all of whom areChinese.

Schools in China act in loco parentis, and thus written parental permissionwas not obtained for the children. Nevertheless, the parents were aware thattheir children participated in the project.

Measures

Child-rearing Beliefs and Practices. Parental beliefs and behaviours inchild rearing were assessed by using a Chinese version of Block’s ChildRearing Practices Report (CRPR; Block, 1981). There are 91 items in thismeasure that tap different types of parenting practices such asencouragement of independence, punishment, induction, emphasis onachievement, inhibition of affection, and emphasis on conformity. Thismeasure has been used and proved appropriate in Chinese and many othercultures (e.g. Block, 1981; Lin & Fu, 1990; Mizuta, Zahn-Waxler, Cole, &Hiruma, 1996). On the basis of Baumrind’s (1971) and Maccoby andMartin’s (1983) paradigms, Kochanska, Kuczynski, and Radke-Yarrow(1989) have recently reconceptualised parenting patterns as re�ected bythese items and derived the indices of authoritative and authoritarian styles.The authoritative parenting consists of a set of items describing rationalguidance, inductive reasoning, encouragement of child independenc e,parent-child communication and emphasis on achievement (e.g. “I respectmy child’s opinions and encourage him/her to express them”; “I encouragemy child to be curious, to explore and question things”; “I talk it over andreason with my child when he/she misbehaves”). Authoritarian parentingconsists of items describing physical punishment, verbal reprimands,power-assertive strategies, and discouragement of the child’s emotionalexpression and of verbal give-and-take between parent and child (e.g. “I donot allow my child to question my decisions”; “I believe physical punishmentto be the best way of disciplining”; “I believe that scolding and criticism




make my child improve”). It has been found that the indexes of authoritativeand authoritarian patterns are valid in predicting observed parentalbehaviours, parent-child interactions and the child’s social behaviour s(Kochanska, 1990; Kochanska et al., 1989). Kochanska et al.’s approach inconstructing authoritative and authoritarian patterns based on the CRPRitems was adopted in some studies of parenting in Chinese and other cultures(e.g. Chao, 1994; Dekovic, Janssens, & Gerris, 1991). In keeping with theliterature, this approach was also used in the present study.

The original format of the CRPR is Q-sort. As recommended by otherauthors (Chao, 1994; Dekovic et al., 1991; Lin & Fu, 1990; Rickel & Biasatti,1982), however, 5-point Likert-type scale was used in the present study inorder to facilitate data collection. Parents were requested to rate each itemin the CRPR on a scale ranging from 1 to 5 (1 5 strongly disagree;5 5 strongly agree). The measure was translated and back-translated toensure comparability with the English versions. No evidence was found in aseries of pilot studies that Chinese parents had dif�culty understanding theitems in the measure.

Exploratory and con�rmatory factor analyses of the data in the Chinesesample indicated that authoritative and authoritarian items as identi�ed byKochanska (1990) clearly loaded on their corresponding factors. Thus,authoritative and authoritarian scores were computed by summing the itemsin each category, with higher scores indicating more authoritative orauthoritarian parenting. The mean scores of authoritative and authoritarianpatterns were 103.03 (SD 5 9.76) and 63.02 (SD 5 9.11), respectively formothers, and 101.19 (SD 5 11.65) and 61.29 (SD 5 7.60), respectively forfathers. Nonsigni�cant differences were found between mothers and fathersin authoritative and authoritarian patterns. Internal consistencies forauthoritative and authoritarian patterns were .85 and .75 respectively formothers, and .89 and .78, respectively for fathers in the present study.

Peer Assessments of Social Behaviour. Peer assessments of socialbehaviour were assessed using a Chinese version of the Revised Class Play(Masten et al., 1985). Consistent with the procedures outlined by Masten etal. (1985), during administration, each child was �rst provided a booklet inwhich each of 30 behavioural descriptors (e.g. “Someone who is a goodleader”) and the names of all students in the class were printed on each page.After the administrator read one behavioural descriptor, children wererequested to nominate up to three classmates who could best play the role ifthey were to direct a Class Play. When all children in the class completedtheir nominations, they turned to the next item, until nominations for all 30items were obtained. Subsequently, nominations received from allclassmates were used to compute each item score for each child. The itemscores were standardised within the class to adjust for differences in the




number of nominators. Factor analysis revealed three orthogonal factors inthis measure: Sociability-leadership (e.g. “A person who everyone listensto”, “Somebody who makes new friends easily”), Aggression-disruption(e.g. “Someone who gets into a lot of �ghts”, “Someone who picks on otherkids”), and Shyness-sensitivity (e.g. “Someone who is very shy”, “Someonewhose feelings are easily hurt”) (Chen et al., 1992). The measure has provedreliable and valid in Chinese children (Chen et al., 1992; Chen & Rubin,1994).

Sociometric Nominations. Children were asked to nominate threeclassmates with whom he/she most liked to be and three classmates withwhom he/she least liked to be. The nominations received from all classmateswere totalled and then standardised within each class to permit appropriatecomparisons. The positive nominations received from peers provided anindex of peer acceptance. The negative playmate nominations received frompeers provided an index of peer rejection. Both positive and negativesociometric nominations were proven reliable in Chinese children (Chen etal., 1992). Following Coie, Dodge, and Coppotelli’s procedure (1982), anindex of peer sociometric preference, which indicates how well a child isliked by peers, was formed by subtracting negative nomination scores fromthe positive nomination scores.

Teacher Ratings. In Chinese schools, one teacher is usually in charge of aclass. This head instructor often teaches one major course, such as Chineselanguage or mathematics; he/she also takes care of the various political,social, administrative, and daily affairs and activities of the class. The headteacher usually instructs the same group of children over several years, thus,he/she is very familiar with the students. Following procedures outlined byHightower et al. (1986), the head teacher in each class was asked to completethe Teacher-Child Rating Scale (T-CRS; Hightower et al., 1986) for eachchild in his/her class. Teachers were asked to rate, on a 5-point scale, howwell each of the items described the child. The complete measure consists oftwo parts: (1) an assessment of elementary school children’s problembehaviours, and (2) an assessment of elementary children’s schoolcompetencies. Part I consists of 18 items describing problem behaviours.Consistent with the results of the original study (Hightower et al., 1986),three factors were identi�ed: (1) Acting-out/aggression (e.g. “Disruptive inclass”); (2) Shyness-Anxiety (e.g. “Shy, timid”), and (3) Learning Problems(“Having problems in learning academic subjects”). Part II of the T-CRSconsists of 20 items concerning school-related competencies. The items inthis part of the original measure involve four areas: (1) assertive social skills;(2) frustration tolerance; (3) task orientation; and (4) peer social skills(Hightower et al., 1986). Factor analyses revealed that the 20 items (e.g.




1The correlations between teacher ratings and peer assessments were .55, P , .001, onsociability, .63, P, , .001, on aggression, and .15, P , .01, on shyness. The patterns of relationsbetween teacher and peer assessments of social functioning and parenting styles were virtuallyidentical.

“Participates in class discussion”; “Is friendly toward peers”) represented asingle factor. Thus, for purposes of the present study, we used only a globalscore, which we referred to as school social competence. The T-CRS hasproved reliable and valid in Chinese children (Chen & Rubin, 1994).Because the items for peer-assessed sociability-leadership and teacher-assessed school-related social competence virtually re�ected the sameconstruct, to reduce overlap and redundancy in analyses, peer and teacherassessment scores were standardised and then aggregated to form a singleindex of sociability-competence. Similarly, peer and teacher assessments onaggression and shyness were aggregated to form a single index of thecorresponding construct.1

School Academic Achievement. Information concerning academicachievement in Chinese and mathematics was obtained for all participantsfrom the school records. The scores of academic achievement were based ontwo �nal term examinations that were conducted before and after thecollection of other data (February and July 1994). Maximum scores forChinese and mathematics were 100; a test score of 60 is usually consideredthe cut-off between a pass and a failure. The scores based on the twoexaminations were summed to form a single index of academic achievementin Chinese and mathematics. Academic achievement in Chinese andmathematics were signi�cantly correlated with each other (r 5 .55, P , .001)and with teacher-rated learning problems (rs 5 2 .40 and 2 .45, P , .001,respectively). Thus, a single index of school achievement was formed byaggregating standardised academic achievement scores with reversedstandardised learning problems scores.

Distinguished Studentship. There is usually an evaluation of eachstudent by the end of each academic year in Chinese schools. Students whoare judged by classmates and teachers to be morally “good” as well asintellectually and physically competent, may be nominated for the school ormunicipal award of “distinguished student in three areas” (san hao xuesheng, in Mandarin). There are different levels of “distinguished student”,from the class level, to the school level, to the district level, and �nally to themunicipal level. Once approved by the school, the District EducationalBureau, or the Municipal Educational Bureau, the students who obtain thestatus of “distinguished student” are given awards in collective meetings.The achievement of this honour is recorded in the student � le and acerti�cate of honourship is delivered to the family. “Distinguished




TABLE 1Intercorrelations among Child Social and School Variables

1 2 3 4 5

1. Sociometic preference2. Sociability .60***3. Aggression 2 .43*** 2 .26***4. Shyness .14** .19*** 2 .095. Distinguished studentship .50*** .70*** 2 .21*** .076. School achievemen t .53*** .61*** 2 .47*** 2 .02 .53***

**P , .01; ***P , .001.

studentship” was coded as follows: students who did not receive any awardsin the past year received a score of zero; students who received the award atthe class level over the past year received a score of 1; and students whoreceived the award beyond the class level received a score of 2. The meanscore of this variable was .50 (SD 5 .61).

RESULTS

Intercorrelations among child social and school variables are presented inTable 1. The results indicated that peer sociometric preference, sociability-competence, distinguished studentship and academic achievement werepositively correlated. These variables were negatively correlated withaggression-disruption. Shyness was positively correlated with peerpreference and sociability-competence. The magnitudes of the correlationswere from low to moderate, suggesting that these measures tapped different,overlapping aspects of school adjustment.

We examined whether there were gender differences in the relationsbetween parenting practices and child variables (i.e. whether the relationswere moderated by gender). Multiple regression analyses were used for thispurpose as parenting variables were continuous variables. In the analyses,each of the child social and school variables was the criterion variable. Theinteraction between child gender and each of the parenting variables wasentered into the equation after the main effects of gender and parentingwere controlled. Signi�cant interactions were found: (1) between childgender and mothers’ authoritative parenting in predicting aggression-disruption, R2 change 5 .02, P , .05; (2) between gender and mothers’authoritarian parenting in predicting sociability-competence, R2

change 5 .02, P , .05; and (3) between gender and mothers’ authoritarianparenting in predicting shyness, R2 change 5 .04, P , .01. Correlations forboys and girls were computed and are presented in Table 1 separately whensigni�cant gender differences in the relations were found.

The results indicated that authoritarian parenting style of both parentswas signi�cantly and positively correlated with aggression-disruption. The




TABLE 2Correlations between Parenting Practices and Child Social and School Performance

Mother (N 5 263) Father (N 5 249)

Authoritative Authoritarian Authoritative Authoritarian

Sociometric preference .15** 2 .19** .13* 2 .36***Sociability .15** .06/ 2 .22** .13* 2 .30***Aggression .07/ 2 .27*** .19** 2 .16** .27***Shyness 2 .01 .03/ 2 .31*** 2 .05 2 .25***Distinguished studentship .13* 2 .16** .13* 2 .31***School achievemen t .10* 2 .27*** .19** 2 .31***

Note: Correlations for boys and girls are presented before and after the slash, respectivelywhen signi�cant sex differences were found.

*P , .05; **P , .01; ***P , .001.

results also indicated that authoritarian style of both parents wassigni�cantly and negatively correlated with sociometric preference,distinguished studentship and school achievement. Fathers’ authoritarianparenting was signi�cantly and negatively correlated with sociability-competence and shyness. Mothers’ authoritarian parenting was signi�cantlyand negatively correlated with sociability-competence and shyness for girls,but not for boys.

Authoritative style of both parents was signi�cantly and positivelycorrelated with peer sociometric preference, sociability-competence,distinguished studentship, and school achievement. Fathers’ authoritativeparenting was signi�cantly and negatively correlated with aggression-disruption. Mothers’ authoritative parenting style was signi�cantly andnegatively correlated with aggression-disruption for girls, but not for boys.No other correlations were signi�cant. In general, these results suggestedthat children of authoritarian parents tended to have problems in socialadjustment and academic performance in the school. In contrast, childrenwho had authoritative parents tended to adjust well both socially andacademically in the school.

A series of regression analyses was conducted to examine relativecontributions of the parenting variables to the prediction of child social andschool performance. Because there were signi�cant gender differences inthe relations between mothers’ parenting styles and child sociability-competence, aggression-disruption and shyness, regression analyses wereconducted separately for boys and girls for these social variables. Given theparallel status of the four parenting variables, they were entered into theequation simultaneously to control for overlap among the variables .

We �rst found that mothers’ authoritative parenting style was signi�cantlyand uniquely predictive of sociometric preference over and above thecontributions of other parenting variables, b 5 .13, P , .05. Fathers’




authoritative style signi�cantly and positively predicted school achievement,b 5 .18, P , .01. Fathers’ authoritarian parenting signi�cantly and negativelycontributed to the prediction of sociometric preference, b 5 2 .37, P , .001,distinguished studentship, b 5 2 .32, P , .001, and school achievement,b 5 2 .23, P , .01. The analyses that were conducted separately for boys andgirls revealed that mothers’ authoritative styles signi�cantly and negativelypredicted aggression-disruption for girls, b 5 2 .18, P , .05, but not for boys.In addition, fathers’ authoritarian style signi�cantly predicted sociability-competence for both boys and girls, b 5 2 .30, P , .01, and b 5 2 .36,P , .001, respectively, aggression-disruption for both boys and girls, b 5 .32,P , .01, and b 5 .19, P , .05, and shyness for girls, b 5 2 .28, P , .01. Noother parenting variables signi�cantly predicted child variables. The totalvariance that was accounted for by the four parenting variables (R2) was16% for sociometric preference, 12% for distinguished studentship, 17% forschool achievement. The parenting variables accounted for 11% and 20% ofthe variance of sociability-competence, 11% and 15% of the variance ofaggression-disruption, and 2% and 16% of the variance of shyness, for boysand girls, respectively.

Finally, because the children in this sample were from families in whichparents had different occupational and educational levels, we examinedwhether parental occupation and education were related to parentingpractices and whether parental occupation and education moderated therelations between parenting and child social and school adjustment.Parental educational levels and occupations were signi�cantly correlated,rs 5 .42 and .51, P , .001, for mothers and fathers, respectively; they werestandardised and then aggregated to form a single index of social status foreach parent (see Chen & Rubin, 1994 for further information).

It was found that parental social status was signi�cantly and positivelycorrelated with authoritative patterns, r 5 .15, P , .01, and .13, P , .05, formothers and fathers, respectively. Moreover, mothers’ social status wasfound to be signi�cantly and negatively correlated with authoritarianparenting, r 5 2 .17, P , .01. There was nonsigni�cant relation betweenfathers’ social status and authoritarian parenting style. The results suggestedthat parents with a relatively higher occupational and educational level weremore likely to use authoritative practices and less likely to use authoritarianpractices in child rearing. Regression analyses revealed that interactionsbetween parental social status and parenting practices were nonsigni�cant inpredicting child social and school variables. The results indicated that therelations between authoritative and authoritarian parenting practices andsocial functioning and school achievement were consistent for children fromfamilies with different occupational and educational status.




DISCUSSION

It has been found consistently that Chinese parents are more authoritarianand less authoritative than North American parents (e.g. Dornbusch et al.,1987; Lin & Fu, 1990). However, little is known about the adaptationa lmeanings of authoritarian and authoritative parenting styles in Chineseculture. In other words, it is unclear how these parenting styles are relevantto social functioning and school performance in Chinese children. Forexample, regardless of cross-cultural differences between Chinese andWestern parents in the mean level of authoritarianism andauthoritativeness, are relative variations among Chinese parents in theseparenting styles associated with different school performance in children?Furthermore, are the patterns of the relations between these parentingstyles and child performance similar to what have been found in Westerncultures (e.g. Baumrind, 1971)?

The results of the present study indicated that, inconsistent with thearguments in the literature (e.g. Chao, 1994; Darling & Steinberg, 1993;Ekblad, 1986; Steinberg et al., 1992; Wu, 1981), authoritarian andauthoritative parenting styles were relevant to children’s academic successand social adjustment in China. It was found that authoritarian parenting ofboth mothers and fathers was positively associated with aggression-disruption and negatively associated with peer acceptance, sociability-competence, distinguished studentship, and school achievement. It was alsofound that authoritative parenting style was positively related to children’speer acceptance, social competence, and school achievement and negativelyrelated to children’s social dif�culties. The results of the regression analyseswere largely consistent with these �ndings. Thus, it may be safe to concludethat authoritarian and authoritative parenting practices in Chinese cultureserve the functions in child rearing that are similar to those found in Westerncultures (e.g. Baumrind, 1971; Maccoby & Martin, 1983). In both cultures,authoritarian parenting, as represented by parental enforcement,punishment and negative affect, may lead to confusion, frustration andfeelings of insecurity in children which, in turn, may lead to deviant socialbehaviours and peer rejection in the school. Furthermore, given thatauthoritarian parents provide little explanation, guidance, and emotionalsupport in child rearing, their children may be less likely than others todevelop intrinsic achievement motivation and more likely than othersto experience dif�culties in academic performance, which may in turn leadto further parental disappointment and rejection. In contrast, authoritativeparenting based on warmth, induction, and encouragement of explorationmay be associated with con�dence and positive orientation towards theworld which, in turn, may lead to child competent behaviour in the peergroup and high academic motivation and achievement.




It was found that parental social status was positively associated withauthoritative patterns and negatively associated with authoritarianparenting style, although the associations were weak. Compared withparents who had low educational and occupational levels, parents with arelatively high social status appeared to be less likely to value authoritarian,power-assertive, and punitive strategies, and more likely to understand theimportance of inductive and rational parenting for social and cognitivedevelopment in children. Nevertheless, nonsigni�cant interactions betweenparental social status and parenting styles were found on peer acceptance,social functioning, and academic achievement in children. Thus, therelevancy of authoritarian and authoritative parenting practices to socialcompetence and academic performance was consistent for children fromfamilies with different occupational and educational status.

The results of the present study suggested also that parenting practicesmight function differently at cross-cultural and intra-cultural levels;generalisation of the �ndings from one level to the other might beinappropriate. Although differences between Chinese and North Americanparents in parenting practices may not account for cross-cultural differencesin children’s academic achievement (e.g. Dornbusch et al., 1987), it would beincorrect to conclude that authoritarian and authoritative parenting patternsor parental in�uences are irrelevant to individual differences in schoolperformance within Chinese or American culture. Consistently, the �ndingsconcerning the associations between authoritarian and authoritativeparenting styles and children’s school performance in Chinese andAmerican Cultures do not imply that cross-cultural differences in schoolperformance between Chinese and American children may necessarily beexplained by different parenting styles in Chinese and American parents.

It was found in the present study that authoritarian parenting style wassigni�cantly and negatively associated with shyness-social inhibition. Thisresult was opposite to the �ndings that authoritarian practices are positivelypredictive of shy, restrained, and reticent behaviour in Western children(e.g. Baumrind, 1971; Mills & Rubin, 1993). The different results concerningthe relations between parenting practices and shyness-inhibition in Chineseand Western children may be due to the different meanings of shy-inhibitedbehaviour in the two cultures. As we described earlier, although shy,anxious, and restrained behaviour is considered socially immature andincompetent, indicating internalising problems in the West (Achenbach &Edelbrock, 1981), it is acceptable in Chinese culture (e.g. Chen et al., 1992,1995a, b). Indeed, shy-inhibited children are regarded as understanding andwell behaved in China. Consistent with this argument, it was found in thepresent study that shyness-inhibition was positively associated withsociability-competence and peer social preference. Given this background,




it is conceivable that authoritarian parenting is negatively associated withshyness-inhibition in Chinese children.

The child’s gender may serve as a moderating variable in the in�uences offamily conditions, including parenting practices, on social and schoolperformance. For example, it has been reported that girls may be moreinvolved in family activities, especially with the mother (e.g. Crouter et al.,1995), and thus more responsive and sensitive to parental in�uences thanboys (e.g. Hart et al., 1992). This may be also the case in China because girlsare often encouraged to help the mother with household chores whereasboys are typically encouraged to go out and play with peers. Consequently,parenting styles and family conditions may have greater impact on girls thanon boys. This argument was consistent with the �ndings in the present studyconcerning gender differences in the relations between mothers’ parentingstyles and child social functioning. It was found that mothers’ authoritativeparenting signi�cantly and negatively predicted aggression-disruption forgirls; however, the association between the two variables was nonsigni�cantfor boys. Moreover, it was found that mothers’ authoritarian style wassigni�cantly and negatively associated with social competence and shyness-inhibition for girls, but not for boys. These results suggested that boys andgirls might respond differently to mothers’ parenting behaviour.

There were several limitations in this study. First, we used the Block’sCRPR to measure parenting practices so that the results could be comparedwith the Western literature extant. Although this measure has beencommonly used and proved valid in other cultures (e.g. Lin & Fu, 1990;Mizuta et al., 1996) and although the results of the present studydemonstrated meaningful associations between authoritative andauthoritarian parenting styles and social and school performance in Chinesechildren, it is important to examine systematically the validity of themeasure in broader areas of Chinese children’s adjustment in the future.Second, due to the “one-child-per-family” policy in China, almost all of theparticipants in our sample were children who did not have siblings. It shouldbe noted that researchers have recently found nonsigni�cant differencesbetween only and sibling children in China (e.g. Chen, Rubin, & Li, 1994).Moreover, there is no extant evidence indicating that only versus siblingstatus may moderate or confound the relations between parenting and childfunctioning. Nevertheless, one should be careful in generalising the resultsof this study to other populations. Finally, the present study wascorrelational in nature. It has been argued that, although parental behaviourin�uences child behaviour and performance, child characteristics andbehaviour may affect parenting (Bell & Chapman, 1986; Lytton, 1990).Thus, the �ndings concerning the relations between authoritarian andauthoritative parenting practices and child social adjustment and schoolachievement in the present study should be understood with caution in terms




of causal in�uences. Nevertheless, regardless of the direction of effect, theresults concerning the associations between authoritarian and authoritativeparenting styles and child social and school adjustment demonstrated therelevancy of these parenting styles in Chinese culture. This is the majorcontribution of the study to the area of parenting.

Manuscript received July 1996Revised manuscript received April 1997

REFERENCESAchenbach, T.M., & Edelbrock, C. (1981). Behavioral problems and competencies reported

by parents of normal and disturbed children aged four through sixteen. Monographs of theSociety for Research in Child Development, 46 (Serial No. 188).

Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Baumrind, D. (1967). Child care practices anteceding 3 patterns of preschool behaviour.

Genetic Psychology Monographs, 75, 43–88.Baumrind, D. (1971). Current patterns of parental authority. Developmental Psychology

Monograph, 4 (1, Pt. 2).Baumrind, D. (1991). The in�uences of parenting style on adolescent competence and

substance use. Journal of Early Adolescence, 11, 56–95.Bell, R.Q., & Chapman, M. (1986). Child effects in studies using experimental or brief

longitudinal approaches to socialization. Developmental Psychology, 22, 595–603.Belsky, J., Gilstrap, B., & Rovine, M. (1984). The Pennsylvania Infant and Family

Development Project: I. Stability and change in mother-infant and father-infant interactionin a family setting at one, three, and nine months. Child Development, 49, 929–949.

Block, J.H. (1981). The Child-Rearing Practices Report (CRPR): A set of Q items for thedescription of parental socialization attitudes and values. Berkeley, CA: University ofCalifornia, Institute of Human Development.

Bornstein, M.H. (1991). Cultural approaches to parenting. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence ErlbaumAssociates Inc.

Bornstein, M.H. (1995). Handbook of parenting. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence ErlbaumAssociates Inc.

Chao, R.K. (1994). Beyond parental control and authoritarian parenting style:Understanding Chinese parenting through the cultural notion of training. ChildDevelopment , 65, 1111–1119.

Chen, X. (in press). The changing Chinese family: Resources, parenting practices, andchildren’s socio-emotional problems. In U.P. Gielen & A.L. Comunian (Eds.), Family andfamily therapy in international perspective. Milan: Marinelli Editrice.

Chen, X., & Kaspar, V. (in press). Cross-cultural research on childhood. In U.P. Gielen & A.L.Conmunian (Eds.), Cross-cultural and international dimensions of psychology. Trieste:Edinzioni Lint Trieste.

Chen, X., & Rubin, K.H. (1994). Family conditions, parental acceptance and socialcompetence and aggression. Social Development, 3, 269–290.

Chen, X., Rubin, K.H., & Li, B. (1994). Only children and sibling children in urban China: Are-examination. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 17, 413–421.

Chen, X., Rubin, K.H., & Li, B. (1995a) . Depressed mood in Chinese children: Relationswith school performance and family environment. Journal of Consulting and ClinicalPsychology, 63, 938–947.




Chen, X., Rubin, K.H., & Li, Z. (1995b). Social functioning and adjustment in Chinesechildren: A longitudinal study. Developmental Psychology, 31, 531–539.

Chen, X., Rubin, K.H., & Sun, Y. (1992). Social reputation and peer relationships in Chineseand Canadian children: A cross-cultural study. Child Development, 63, 1336–1343.

Chiu, L.H. (1987). Child-rearing attitudes of Chinese, Chinese-American, and Anglo-American mothers. International Journal of Psychology, 22, 409–419.

Coie, J.D., Dodge, K.A., & Coppotelli, H. (1982). Dimensions and types of social status: A�ve-year longitudinal study. Developmental Psychology, 18, 557–570.

Coie, J.D., Dodge, K.A., & Kupersmidt, J.B. (1990). Peer group behavior and social status. InS.R. Asher & J.D. Coie (Eds.), Peer rejection in childhood (pp. 17–59). New York:Cambridge University Press.

Coopersmith, S. (1967). The antecedents of self-esteem. San Francisco: Freeman.Crouter, A.C., Manke, B.A., & McHale, S.M. (1995). The family context of gender

intensi�cation in early adolescence. Child Development, 66, 317–329.Darling, N., & Steinberg, L. (1993). Parenting style as context: An integrative model.

Psychological Bulletin, 113, 487–496.Dekovic, M., & Janssens, J.M. (1992). Parents’ child-rearing styles and child’s sociometric

status. Developmental Psychology, 28, 925–932.Dekovic, M., Janssens, J.M., & Gerris, J.R.M. (1991). Factor structure and construct validity

of the Block Child Rearing Practices Report (CRPR). Psychological Assessment, 3,182–187.

Dornbusch, S., Ritter, P., Leiderman, R., Roberts, D., & Fraleigh, M. (1987). The relation ofparenting style to adolescent school performance. Child Development, 58, 1244–1257.

Eisenberg, N., & Murphy, B. (1995). Parenting and children’s moral development. In M.H.Bornstein (Ed.), Handbook of parenting: Vol. 4. Applied and practical parenting (pp.227–258). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.

Ekblad, S. (1986). Relationships between child-rearing practices and primary schoolchildren’s functional adjustment in the People’s Republic of China. Scandinavian Journal ofPsychology, 27, 220–230.

Fauber, R., Forehand, R., Long, N., Burke, M., & Faust, J. (1987). The relationship of youngadolescent Children’s Depression Inventory (CDI) scores to their social and cognitivefunctioning. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 9, 161–172.

Garcia Coll, C.T., Meyer, E.C., & Brillon, L. (1995). Ethnic and minority parenting. In M.H.Bornstein (Ed.), Handbook of parenting: Vol. 3. Status and social conditions of parenting(pp. 189–209). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.

Harkness, S., & Super, C.M. (1995). Culture and parenting. In M.H. Bornstein (Ed.),Handbook of parenting: Vol. 2. Biology and ecology of parenting (pp. 211–234). Mahwah,NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.

Hart, C.H., DeWolf, D.M., Wozniak, P., & Burts, D.C. (1992). Maternal and paternaldisciplinary styles: Relations with preschoolers’ playground behavioral orientations andpeer status. Child Development, 63, 879–892.

Hightower, A.D., Work, W.C., Cohen, E.L., Lotyczewski, B.S., Spinell, A.P., Guare, J.C., &Rohrbeck, C.A. (1986). The Teacher-Child Rating Scale: A brief objective measure ofelementary children’s school problem behaviours and competences. School PsychologyReview, 15, 393–409.

Ho, D.Y.F. (1986). Chinese pattern of socialization: A critical review. In M.H. Bond (Ed.),The psychology of the Chinese people (pp. 1–37). New York: Oxford University Press.

Kellam, S.G., Brown, C.H., Rubin, B.R., & Ensminger, M.E. (1983). Paths leading to teenagepsychiatric symptoms and substance use: Developmental epidemiological studies inWoodlawn. In S.B. Guze, F.J. Earls, & J.E. Barrett (Eds.), Childhood psychopathology anddevelopment (pp. 17–51). New York: Raven.




Kelley, M.L. (1992). Cultural differences in child rearing: A comparison of immigrantChinese and Caucasian American mothers. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 23,444–455.

Kelley, M.L., Power, T.G., & Wimbush, D.D. (1992). Determinants of disciplinary practicesin low-income Black mothers. Child Development, 63, 573–582.

King, A.Y.C., & Bond, M.H. (1985). The Confucian paradigm of man: A sociological view. InW.S. Tseng & D.Y.H. Wu (Eds.), Chinese culture and mental health (pp. 29–42). Orlando,FL: Academic Press.

Kochanska, G. (1990). Maternal beliefs as long-term predictors of mother-child interactionand report. Child Development, 61, 1934–1943.

Kochanska, G., Kuczynski, L., & Radke-Yarrow, M. (1989). Correspondence betweenmothers’ self-reported and observational child-rearing practices. Child Development, 60,56–63.

Lamborn, S.D., Mounts, N.S., Steinberg, L., & Dornbusch, S.M. (1991). Patterns ofcompetence and adjustment among adolescents from authoritative, authoritarian,indulgent, and neglectful families. Child Development, 62, 1049–1065.

Lempers, J.D., Clark-Lempers, D., & Simons, R.L. (1989). Economic hardship, parenting,and distress in adolescence. Child Development, 60, 138–151.

Lin, C.C., & Fu, V.R. (1990). A comparison of child-rearing practices among Chinese,immigrant Chinese, and Caucasian-American parents. Child Development, 61, 429–433.

Lytton, H. (1990). Child and parent effects in boys’ conduct disorder: A reinterpretation.Developmental Psychology, 26, 683–697.

Maccoby, E.E., & Martin, C.N. (1983). Socialization in the context of the family: Parent-childinteraction. In E.M. Hetherington (Ed.), Handbook of child psychology: Vol. 4.Socialization, personality and social development (pp.1–102). New York: Wiley.

Masten, A., Morison, P., & Pelligrini, D. (1985). A revised class play method of peerassessment. Child Development, 21, 523–533.

Mills, R., & Rubin, K.H. (1993). Socialization factors in the development of socialwithdrawal. In K.H. Rubin & J. Asendorpf (Eds.), Social withdrawal, inhibition and shynessin childhood (pp. 117–148). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.

Mizuta, I., Zahn-Waxler, C., Cole, P.M., & Hiruma, N. (1996). A cross-cultural study ofpreschoolers’ attachment: Security and sensitivity in Japanese and US dyads. InternationalJournal of Behavioral Development, 19, 141–159.

Morison, P., & Masten, A. (1991). Peer reputation in middle childhood as a predictor ofadaptation in adolescence: A seven-year follow-up. Child Development, 62, 991–1007.

Parke, R.D. (1994). Fathers and families. In M.H. Bornstein (Ed.), Handbook of parentingVol.3. Status and social conditions of parenting (pp. 27–63). Mahwah, NJ: LawrenceErlbaum Associates Inc.

Parker, J.G., & Asher, S.P. (1987). Peer relations and later personal adjustment: Arelow-accepted children at risk? Psychology Bulletin, 102, 357–389.

Rickel, A.U., & Biasatti, L.L. (1982). Modi�cation of the Block child rearing practicesreport. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 38, 129–134.

Rubin, K.H. & Asendorpf, J. (1993). Social withdrawal, inhibition, and shyness in childhood.Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.

Steinberg, L., Dornbusch, S., & Brown, B.B. (1992). Ethnic differences in adolescentachievement: An ecological perspective. American Psychologists, 47, 723–729.

Stevenson, H.W., Lee, S., Chen, C., Stigler, J.W., Hsu, C., & Kitamura, S. (1990). Contexts ofachievement. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 55 (Serial No.221).

Whiting, B.B., & Edwards, C.P. (1988). Children of different worlds. Cambridge, MA:Harvard University Press.




Weiss, B., Dodge, K.A., Bates, J.E., & Pettit, G.S. (1992). Some consequences of early harshdiscipline: Child aggression and maladaptive social information processing style. ChildDevelopment , 63, 1321–1335.

Wu, D.H. (1981). Child abuse in Taiwan. In J.E. Korbin (Ed.), Child abuse and neglect:Cross-cultural perspectives (pp. 139–165). Los Angeles, CA: University of California Press.

Zahn-Waxler, C., Radke-Yarrow, M., & King, R. (1979). Child rearing and children’sprosocial initiations toward victims of distress. Child Development, 50, 319–330.

Download - Authoritative and Authoritarian Parenting Practices and Social and School Performance in Chinese Children

Top Related