what is best for your children? authoritative vs ... · what is best for your children?...

What Is Best for Your Children? Authoritative vs. Indulgent Parenting Styles

and Psychological Adjustment of Spanish Adolescents

Enrique Gracia, Fernando Garcia, and Marisol Lila

University of Valencia, Spain

Abstract A growing body of research suggests that the authoritative style of parenting is not always necessarily associated with optimum psychological and social outcomes among adolescents. This paper analyzed the relationships between parenting styles and adolescents' psychological adjustment using a two-dimension four-typology model of parenting styles, with the aim to determine which style of parenting Authoritative vs. indulgent was associated with optimum psychological adjustment outcomes among Spanish adolescents. Parenting styles were measured with the Parental Acceptance-Rejection/Control Questionnaire (Rohner, 1990). The outcome measures were six indicators of psychological adjustment measured with the Personality Assessment Questionnaire (Rohner, 1990). Multivariate Analyses of Variance (MANOVAs) were conducted with a sample of 489 Spanish children. Results suggest that adolescents of indulgent families do perform equal or even better in measures of psychological adjustment than adolescents from authoritative households. Authoritarian and neglectful parenting was associated, in general, with the minimum adjustment of adolescents.

Research examining relat ionships be tween parent ing styles and

children's outcomes fo l l ow largely a four typo logy model of parental

socialization styles. In 1983, Maccoby and Mar t in proposed, af ter Baumrind's

(1967, 1971) t r ipar t i te model—authori tat ive-authori tar ian-permissive—a

bidimensional mode l of parental socialization in wh ich the dimensions

demandingness and responsiveness were theoret ical ly o r thogona l (Darl ing

113

Parenting Styles and Psychological Adjustment

& Steinberg, 1993; Smetana, 1995). These dimensions have similar meanings to those of the traditional dimensions of control and affect, or others, more recently proposed, such as those of strictness/supervision and acceptance/ implication (e.g., Chao, 2001; Lamborn, Mounts, Steinberg, & Dombusch, 1991; Steinberg, Lamborn, Darling, Mounts, & Dornbusch, 1994). From the combination of the two dimensions of demandingness (control) and responsiveness (warmth), four typologies emerge: authoritative parents-high in demandingness and responsiveness; neglectful parents-low in demandingness and responsiveness; indulgent parents-low in demandingness and high in responsiveness; and authoritarian parents—high in demandingness and low in responsiveness. This four-typology or quadripartite model stresses, according to Lamborn et al. (1991), the need to consider the effects of the combination of the two parenting dimensions in the analysis of their relationship to children's outcomes.

In general, research conducted in Anglo-Saxon contexts with middle-class European American samples has traditionally identified the authoritative parenting style (i.e., warm and responsive parents that provide at the same time firm control and maturity demands) as the optimal parenting style as it has been consistently associated with optimum developmental outcomes of children and adolescents (e.g., Baumrind, 1967; Baumrind & Black, 1967; Gray & Steinberg, 1999; Lamborn et al.,1991; Steinberg et al., 1994). A growing body of research conducted in Anglo-Saxon contexts with ethnic minorities groups, however, suggests that the authoritative style of parenting is not always necessarily associated with optimum outcomes among children and adolescents (e.g., Chao, 1994; Deater-Deckard, Dodge, Bates, & Pettit, 1996; Kim and Rohner, 2002; Steinberg, Dornbusch, & Brown, 1992; Torres-Villa, 1995).

In addition, a substantial number of studies conducted in other cultural contexts suggest that adolescents who characterize their parents as indulgent obtain equal or higher scores on different outcomes than adolescents who describe their parents as authoritative. For example, in the Philippines no-significant differences were found between the authoritative and indulgent households (Hindin, 2005). Several studies conducted in Latin-American countries such as Mexico (Villalobos, Cruz & Sanchez, 2004) and Brazil (Martfnez, Musitu, Garcia, & Camino, 2003; Martfnez, Garcia, & Yubero, 2007), also suggested that adolescent from authoritative households did not differ (academic, social and physical self-esteem outcome) from those

114


brought up in indulgent households. Similar results have been found in European countries such as Germany (Wolfradt, Hempel, & Miles, 2003), and Italy (Marchetti, 1997).

In Spain, where this study was conducted, there is confusing evidence as some studies have supported the idea that authoritative parenting is the optimal parenting style (e.g., Bersabe, Fuentes, & Motrico, 2001), whereas others provided support to the idea that the indulgent style may be associated with optimum developmental outcomes (Musitu & Garcia, 2001, 2004). In this context, the aim of this paper is to determine which parenting style (authoritative vs. indulgent) is associated with optimum psychological outcomes among Spanish adolescents. A two-dimension, four-typology model of parenting styles, and six indicators of psychological adjustment will be used to explore these relationships.

Method

Participants

The data for the present analyses come from self-report questionnaires administered to 1,133 seven- through twelfth-grade students attending one fifteen high schools in Spain. The schools were selected to produce a diverse sample in terms of socio-demographic variables.

Measures

Of interest in the present analyses are several demographic variables, two parenting indices that were used to construct the parenting styles, and six indicators of psychological adjustment as outcome variables.

Demographic variables. Students provided information on their background and current family situation. All respondents indicated their gender (52% women), family structure (83% were intact families), and the amount of education completed by each parent residing with them. Parental education was coded as a two-level variable (less than college completion -36%- or college completion and higher). Because scores on the outcomes and parenting styles may vary as a function of child sex, parental education, and family structure, these variables were included in our analyses of the relationship between parenting styles and adolescent outcomes.

Parenting styles. The index of parenting style was developed to approximate the responsiveness (warmth) and demandingness (control) dimensions suggested by Baumrind (1971) and Maccoby and Martin (1983). Scores on the warmth/affection and control scales were used (PARQ control; Rohner,

115


1990) in the present investigation to assign families to one of four groups, as outlined below. This instrument has been previously use with Spanish speaking samples (e.g., Gracia, 2002; Gracia & Musitu, 1997; Lila & Gracia, 2005). The warmth/affection scale measures the extent to which the adolescent perceives his or her parents as loving, responsive, and involved (sample items: "Tries to help me when I am scared or upset"; "Talks to me about our plans and listens to what I have to say"; 20 items, alpha = .92, mean = .73, SD - .21, range = .0 to 1.0). The control scale assesses parental monitoring and supervision of the adolescent (sample items: "Tells me exactly what time to be home when I go out"; "Gives me certain jobs to do and will not let me do anything else until they are done"; 13 items, alpha = .81, mean = .54, SD = .22, range = .0 to 1.0). In this sample, the dimensions are not inter-correlated (r = -.003, p > .05).

Four parenting categories were defined by trichotomizing the sample on each dimension and examining the two variables simultaneously. Following Lamborn et al., (1991), authoritative families (N = 120) were those who scored in the upper percentiles on both warmth/affection and control, whereas neglectful families (N = 120) were in the lowest percentiles on both variables. Authoritarian families (N = 125) were in the lowest percentile on warmth/affection but in the highest percentile on control. Indulgent families (N = 124) were in the highest tertile on warmth/affection but in the lowest percentile on control. Nearly 45% families (N = 489) fell into one of these four groups. Families who scored in the middle percentile on either of the dimensions were excluded from the analysis in order to ensure that the four groups of families represented distinct categories (Lamborn et al.,1991; Musitu & Garcia, 2001, 2004; Steinberg et al., 1994). Table 1 provides information on the sizes of each of the four parenting groups as well as each group's mean and standard deviation on the warmth/affection and control scales.

Outcome variables. Six indicators of psychological adjustment were used as outcome variables. Table 2 presents means and standard deviations on the outcome variables for the entire sample. Outcome variables have been scaled on four-point Likert scales.

The six indices of personal adjustment were all subscales of the child PAQ (Personality Assessment Questionnaire; Rohner, 1990). This self-report questionnaire assesses the way in which children perceive their own personality and behavioral dispositions. The child PAQ subscales used were:

116


Table i. Numbers of Cases in Parenting Style Croups, and Mean Scores and Standard Deviations on Measures of Warmth/affection and Control

Total Authori- Authori- Indulgent Neglectful tative tarian

Percent 489 120 125 124 120

Freq 100 24.5 25.6 25.4 24.5

Wa/Aff:

M .726 .906 .542 .914 .544

SD .213 .039 .138 .048 .149

Control:

M .543 .714 .751 .359 -347

SD .218 .082 .110 .098 .128

Note. Scores on the warmth/affection and control scales could range from 0 to 1.

1) hostility/aggression (sample item: M I think about fighting or being mean"; alpha = .60), 2) negative self-esteem (sample reverse item: "I like myself"; alpha = .72), 3) negative self-adequacy (sample reverse item: "I can compete successfully for the things I want"; alpha = .61), 4) emotional irresponsiveness (sample item: "It is easy for me to show my friends that I really like them"; alpha = .65), 5) emotional instability (sample item: "I get upset when things go wrong"; alpha = .62), and 6) negative world views (sample reverse item: "I think the world is a good, happy place"; alpha = .74). These reliabilities were within the range of variation commonly observed for these scales in other studies (Rohner & Khaleque, 2005). This instrument has also been previously used with Spanish speaking samples (e.g., Gracia 1995; Gracia, Lila, & Musitu, 2005; Lila, Garcfa, & Gracia, 2007). The PAQ is keyed so that the higher the score, the higher the level of self-reported psychological

117


2.17

1.87

1.80

1.88

2.14

2-59

.30

•48

•52

•48

•56

•52

Table 2. Mean Scores, Standard Deviations, and Ranges of Outcome Variables

(N = 1133)

Variable M SD_

Psychological maladjustment

Hostility/aggression

Negative self-esteem

Negative self-adequacy

Emotional unresponsiveness

Emotional instability

Negative worldview 1.97 .56

maladjustment. The child PAQ includes another subscale (Dependence) that was not used in the present study because, as Rohner and Khaleque (2005) noted, this scale often correlates only weakly or not at all with the PARQ and its constituents scales, and fails to capture important aspects of the construct. In addition, "the dependence scale is theoretically expected to have nonlinear relation with perceived acceptance-rejection" (p. 212).

Plan of Analysis

A three-way multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) was conducted for the outcome variables, with parenting style (authoritative, indulgent, authoritarian vs. neglectful), sex (female vs. male), and parental education (< college vs. college) as the independent variables. Our expectation was that the results would vary as a function of adolescent sex, and socioeconomic status. To this end, we systematically examined the interactive effects of parenting style with each of these variables for the outcome variables.

118


We were also interested in examining whether the results varied as a function of the adolescent's household composition (specifically, intact vs. nonintact). However, the typical low percentage of Spanish nonintact household and the strong correlation in our sample between household composition and parental education precluded our assessing these effects separately in one overall model. Accordingly, we examined the moderating effects of household composition in a series of preliminary analyses. In these analyses, we conducted two-way MANOVAs for the outcome variables, with parenting style (four categories) and household composition (specifically, intact vs. nonintact) as the independent variables. These analyses indicated that the adolescent's family structure does not moderate the relations between parenting style and the various outcomes studied (see Baumrind, 1991 and Lamborn el al. 1991, for similar findings).

Because we did not find moderating effects of family structure, the results we report are based on analyses of the sample with adolescents from different family structures combined. Univariate F follow-up tests were conducted, and significant results on the univariate tests were followed up with Bonferroni's comparisons between all possible pairs of means. Given our primary interest in parenting style and its correlates, we do not focus on main effects of sex, or parental education. When such effects are statistically significant, however, we note them.

Results

No interactions of the three-way MANOVA was statistically significant (see Table 3), hence we analyzed only univariate main effects. Mean scores for each main effect group on each of the measures are presented in Table 4. All of the MANOVAs, as well as the follow- up univariate tests associated with each variable, indicated a significant effect for parenting style (see Table 4), enabling us to carry out the series of pair-wise comparisons (see Table 4 and Figure 1).

Although not central to the thrust of this article, several main effects for sex, and parental education reached significance (see Table 4). The analyses indicated that girls reported more negative self-esteem, and emotional instability than did boys. Adolescents of parents with lower education reported more hostility/aggression, emotional irresponsiveness, emotional instability and negative worldview. In light of the absence or interactive effects, we focus our attention on the main effects of parenting style.

119


Psychological maladjustment. Adolescents who characterized their parents as indulgent scored more positively on all measures of psychological maladjustment than adolescents from authoritarian and negligent families, (except for emotional instability, with unclear results for adolescents of neglectful parents). Also, adolescents from indulgent families scored more positively than adolescents of authoritative parents in four measures of psychological maladjustment (negative self-esteem, negative self-adequacy, emotional irresponsiveness, and negative worldview), and equal in one measure of psychological maladjustment (hostility/aggression). Adolescents who characterized their parents as authoritative scored more positively than adolescents from authoritarian and neglectful families on four measures of psychological maladjustment (hostility/aggression, negative self-esteem, negative self-adequacy, and emotional irresponsiveness). However, although these adolescents scored more positively in the measure of negative worldview than adolescents of authoritarian parents, they scored equal than adolescents from neglectful families. Results for the measure of emotional instability were unclear.

Table 3. Three-way MANOVAs for the Outcome Measures

Source of variation S F

(A) Parental style .742 F(i8,1304.39) = 8.06**"

(B)Sex .953 F(6,461.00) = 3.77" (C) Parental education .968 F(6,461.00) = 2.52*

A x B .954 F(l8,1304.39) = 1.21

AxC .979 F(18,1304.39) = -64 BxC .984 F(6,461.00) = 1.25

A x B x C .957 F(l8,1304.39)^1.13

< .05, * * p < .01, * * * p < .001

Discussion

This study analyzed the relationships between parenting styles and adolescents' psychological adjustment using a two-dimension four-typology model of parenting styles, with the aim to determine which parental style

120


was associated with optimum psychological outcomes among Spanish adolescents. Overall, our results suggest that adolescents of indulgent families do perform equal or even better in several indicators of psychological adjustment than adolescents from authoritative households. Authoritarian and neglectful parenting was associated, in general, with the minimum adjustment of adolescents. This suggests that the indulgent style of parenting can be considered as the optimum one in the Spanish context. This also suggests that in the Spanish contexts parental warmth, acceptance

Table 4. Gender, Parental Education and Four Typologies Means (SD), Main F Values, Probabilities of Type I Error, and Bonferroni Testc for Psychological Maladjustment

Hostility/

aggression

Neg self-

esteem

Neg. self-

adequacy

Emo.

Unresp.

Emo.

Instab.

Neg.

wor ldv iew

Indulg

ent

1.71

(•SO2

1-53 (•54)4

1.66

(•50)3

1.80 (.60)3

2.49 C58)2

1.71 (.60)2

Parental style

A u t h A u t h Negl

o r i ta t or i tar ec t fu

ive ian I

1.87

(•57)2

1.72

(.60)3

1-79 C56)2

2.09

(•67)2

2.66

(.65)

1.99

(•67),b

2.07

(-53)1

2.10

(•55)1

2.13

(-51)1

2.43 (.61)'

273 C60)1

2.21

(.61)-

2.00

(-48)'

1.89

(•51)2

2.00

(-47)1

2-33 (•56)1

2.60

(.55)

2.13

(-56)1

F

F

(3,466)

11.43***

23.98***

20.99***

26.51***

3.86**

16.66***

Femal

e

1.88

(.52)

1.85

(•55)

1.96

(-51)

2.14 (.61)

2.69

(.59)

2.02

(.61)

Gender

Male

0 1.94 (.52)

1-77 (-55)

1.84

(.50

2.19 (.61)

2.55 (.59)

2.00

(.61)

F

F ,466)

1-39

2.76

7.13**

•57

7.41**

.10

Parent Edu<

ColleC°"eS e

1.97 (•50)

1.85

(•52)

1.94

(•48)

2.23

(•58)

2.70 (•56)

2.08

(•58)

(

1.85 (•50)

1.76

(•53)

1.85 (•48)

2.10

(.59)

2.54 (.57)

1-93 (•58)

cation

F

F

1,466)

5.90*

3.32

3.88

5.64*

8.13**

7.13**

cm = .05; 1 > 2 > 3, a > b.; * p < .05, * * p < .01, * * * p < .001

121


2

1

1

00 -

90 -

80 -

70 -

60 -

2 00 -

80 -

60 -

40 -

20 -

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

70 •

60 •

50 •

40 •

30 •

20 •

1 0 •

Hostility/aggression

? 2

Indulgent Authoritative

Negative self-adequacy

— 3 2 —


Emotional instability

_ 2


— -

_ 1 -

Authoritariar

- -

- 1 "

Authoritariar

_ 1 _

Authoritariar

2 ,00 •

1,80 •

1,60 •

1 , 4 0 -

1,20 •

2 ,40 -

2 ,20 •

2 ,00 -

1 , 8 0 -

1 , 6 0 -

1,40 •

1 , 2 0 -

2 , 2 0 •

2 , 0 0 •

1 . 8 0 -

1 .60 •

1 , 4 0 -

1 , 2 0 -

Negative self-esteem

I

Indulgent Authoritative Authoritarian

Emotional irresponsiveness J

— 3 2 1 _|


- Negative worldview J

2 1b 1a]


Figure 1. Means of four typologies —indulgent, authoritative, authoritarian and neglectful— for outcome measures of psychological maladjustment.

and responsiveness are key for optimum psychological outcomes, whereas parental strictness and firm control should not be necessarily associated with these outcomes (see also Lewis, 1981). According to our results, the association between authoritative parenting style and optimum adjustment

122


in offspring found in studies with Euro-American samples can not be generalized to the Spanish cultural context. In addition, our results provide support for a growing body of literature that questions the fact that the association between an authoritative parenting style and optimum adjustment in offspring can be generalized to any cultural or ethnic context (e.g., Chao, 1994; Dwairy, Achoui, Abouserie, & Farah., 2006; Darling & Steinberg, 1993; Dornbusch, et al, 1987; Kim & Chun, 1994; McBride-Chang & Chang, 1998; Musitu & Garcia, 2004; Quoss & Zhao, 1995; Rohner 8c Pettengill, 1985; Steinberg, et al, 1991; Tobin, et al., 1989; Villalobos, et al., 2004;). Particularly, this study reinforces previous research carried out in some Southern European countries such as Italy and Spain (Marchetti, 1997; Musitu & Garcia, 2001, 2004), and other South American countries such as Mexico (Villalobos, et al., 2004) and Brazil (Martinez et al., 2003, 2007), where it has been shown that indulgent parenting is associated with the same or better adolescent adjustment than authoritative parenting, perhaps as a consequence of the emphasis placed on affection and egalitarian relations in those countries (Triandis, 1995, 2001; Gouveia, Clemente, 81 Espinosa, 2003; Musitu & Garcia, 2004; Villalobos, et al, 2004).

In this regard, Chao (1994) has suggested the lack of cross-cultural validity of the affect and control dimension, arguing that these concepts have different meanings in some oriental cultures from those they have in the American culture. This hypothesis of cultural differences would explain the discrepancies between the results of the present work and those obtained in research in "Anglo-Saxon" cultures with native samples. According to this idea, it appears that similar parental socialization styles have different repercussions on children's adjustment depending on the cultural environment in which the socialization takes place. Future research should examine the influence of culture in parent-children relations, and this highlights the need for more cross-cultural studies (e.g., Wang & Li, 2003). The results of the present study reinforce the idea that direct generalization of results to other cultures may lack the necessary rigour and foundation. We would echo the warning of Chao (2001:1841), that "authoritative parents should not be considered the prototype for some groups of Asian-Americans", applying it to the Spanish context.

This study has some limitations. First, our analyses relied on adolescents' self reports, and objective validation of the measure through other data sources was not obtained. Considerable evidence, however, indicates that

123


self-report methods for substance use provided valid data (Johnston & O'Malley, 1985; Morgan, 1997), and similar results have been obtained on parenting styles in spite of different methods of data collection (see Baumrind, 1991, Lamborn et al., 1991; Steinberg et al., 1994). Second, the study was cross-sectional and hence did not provide the possibility to test causal hypotheses. It is possible that adolescents' outcomes influence their parents' child-rearing styles rather than vice versa (see Maccoby, 2000).

Considering the above mentioned limitations, this study was able to show that the authoritative style was not better than the indulgent style for predicting psychological adjustment. The study reinforces the idea that the relationship between parenting styles and adolescents' adjustment is not constant among cultures, and questions the idea that the authoritative style of parenting is always associated with optimum developmental outcomes. For the Spanish culture, our results suggest that adolescents from indulgent families score equal or even higher on several indicators of psychological adjustment that adolescents from authoritative families. At least with respect to psychological adjustment, the combination of high levels of parental warmth and involvement with low levels of control appears to be the best parenting strategy in the Spanish context. Values in family relationships such as equality and tolerance, as well as toward a more permissive and democratic modes of child rearing that tend to characterize contemporary Spanish families seems to support the advantages of the indulgent style of parenting (Alberdi, 1999; Gracia & Herrero, in press; Lila, Van Acken, Musitu, & Buelga, 2006). Future research would need to examine the relationship between parenting styles and a wider range of developmental outcomes for children and adolescents.

References

Alberdi, I. (1999). La nueva familia espanola [The new Spanish family]. Madrid, Spain: Taurus.

Baumrind, D., & Black, A. E. (1967). Socialization practices associated with dimensions of competence in preschool boys and girls. Child Development, 38, 291-327.

124


Baumrind, D. (1991). Parenting styles and adolescent development In J. Brooks-Gunn, R. Lemer, & A. G. Petersen (Eds.), The encyclopedia of adolescence. New York: Garland.

Baumrind, 0.(1967). Child cares practices anteceding three patterns of preschool behavior. Genetic Psychology Monographs, 75, 43-88.

Baumrind, D. (1971). Current patterns of parental authority. Developmental Psychology Monograph, 4 (1, Pt. 2).

Bersabe, R., Fuentes, M. J., & Motrico, E. (2001). Psychometric analysis of two scales to evaluate parents' educational styles. Psicothema, 13, 678-684.

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

Chao, R. K. (2001). Extending research on the consequences of parenting style for Chinese Americans and European Americans. Child Development, 72,1832-1843.

Darling, N., & Steinberg, L (1993). Parenting style as context: An integrative model. Psychological Bulletin, 113, 487-496.

Deater-Deckard, K., Bates, J. E., Dodge, K. A., & Pettit, G. S. (1996). Physical discipline among African American and European American mothers: Links to children's externalizing behaviors. Developmental Psychology, 32,1065-1072.

Dombusch, S., Ritter, P., Liederman, P., Roberts, D., 8c Fraieigh, M. (1987). The relation of parenting style to adolescent school performance. Child Development, 58,1244-1257.

Dwairy, M., Achoui, M., Abouserie, R., & Farah, A. (2006). Adolescent-family connectedness among Arabs: A second cross-regional research study. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 37, 248-261.

Gouveia, V. V., Clemente, M., & Espinosa, P. (2003). The horizontal and vertical attributes of individualism and collectivism in a Spanish population. Journal of Social Psychology, 143, 43-63.

Gracia, E. (1995). Visible but unreported: A case for the "not serious enough" cases of child maltreatment. Child Abuse & Neglect, 9,1083-1093.

Gracia, E. (2002). El maltrato infantil en el contexto de la conducta parental: Percepciones de padres e hijos [Child maltreatment in the context

125


of parental behavior: Children and parents perceptions of]. Psicothema, 14, 274-279.

Gracia, E., & Herrero, J. (In press). Is it considered violence? The acceptability of physical punishment of children in Europe: A multilevel analysis. Journal of Marriage and Family.

Gracia, E., & Musitu, G. (1997). Parental acceptance-rejection, child maltreatment and community social support. International Journal of Child and Family Welfare, 2, 232-246.

Gracia, E., Lila, M., & Musitu, G. (2005). Rechazo parental y ajuste psicologico y social de los hijos parental [Parental rejection and psychological adjustment of children]. Salud Mental, 28, 73-81.

Gray, M. R., 8c Steinberg, L. (1999). Unpacking authoritative parenting: Reassessing a multidimensional construct. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 61, 574-587.

Hindin, M. J. (2005). Family dynamics, gender differences and educational attainment in Filipino adolescents. Journal of Adolescence, 28, 299-316.

Johnston, L, & O'Malley, P. M. (1985). Issues of validity and population coverage in student surveys of drug use. In B. A. Rouse, N. J. Kozel 81 L. G. Richards (Eds.), Self-report methods of estimating drug use: Meeting current challenges to validity (Vol. (ADM) 85-1402, pp. NIDA Research Monograph No. 57, 31-54). Rockville, MD: National Institute on Drug Abuse Research.

Kim U., 81 Chun, M. (1994) Educational "success" of Asian Americans: an indigenous perspective. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 15, 329-343.

Kim, K., & Rohner, R. P. (2002). Parental warmth, control, and involvement in schooling: Predicting academic achievement among Korean American adolescents. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 33, 127-140.

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

126


Lewis, C. C. (1981). The effects of parental firm control: A reinterpretation of findings. Psychological Bulletin, 90, 547-563.

Lila, M., & Gracia, E. (2005). Determinantes de la aceptacion-rechazo parental [Determinants of parental acceptance-rejection]. Psicothema, 17, 107-111.

Lila, M., Garcia, F., & Gracia, E. (2007). Perceived paternal and maternal acceptance and children's outcomes in Colombia. Social Behavior and Personality, 35,115-124.

Lila, M., Van Aken, M. A. G., Musitu, G., & Buelga, S. (2006). Families and adolescents. In S. Jackson, & L. Goossens (Eds.), Handbook of adolescent development (pp. 154-174). London: Psychology Press.

Maccoby, E. E. (2000). Parenting and its effects on children: On reading and misreading behavior genetics. Annual Review of Psychology, 51,1-27.

Maccoby, E. E., & Martin, J. A. (1983). Socialization in the context of the family: Parent-child interaction. In Handbook of child psychology (Vol. 4, pp. 1-101), Mussen P. H. (Ed.). New York: Wiley.

Marchetti, B. (1997). Concetto di se'relazioni familiari e valori [Relations between family and value concepts]. Unpublished Masters thesis. Universita degli Studi di Bologna, Italy.

Martinez, I., Garcfa, J. F., & Yubero, S. (2007). Parenting styles and adolescents' self-esteem in Brazil. Psychological Reports, 100, 731-745.

Martfnez, I., Musitu, G., Garcia, J. F., & Camino, L. (2003). Un analisis transcultural de los efectos de la socializacion familiar en el autoconcepto: Espana y Brasil [A cross-cultural analysis of the effects of family socialization on self-concept: Spain and Brazil]. Psicologia, Educacao e Cultura, 7, 239-258.

Martinez-Gonzalez, M. A., Gual, P., Lahortiga, F., Alonso, Y., de Irala-Estevez, J., & Cervera S. (2003). Parental factors, mass media influences, and the onset of eating disorders in a prospective population-based cohort. Pediatrics, 111, 315-320.

Mcbride-Chang, C, & Chang, L. (1998) Adolescent-parent relations in Hong Kong: parenting styles, emotional autonomy, and school achievement. Journal of Genetic Psychology, 159, 421-436.

Morgan, M. (1997). EMCDDA instrument bank: Core scales, sources and

127


guidelines. A report to the EMCDDA. Lisbon, Portugal: European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction.

Musitu, C, & Garcia, J. F. (2001). ESPA2^. Escala de Sociaiizacion Parental en la Adolescencia [Parental Socialization Scale in Adolescence]. Madrid, Spain: TEA ediciones.

Musitu, G., 8c Garcia, J. F. (2004). Consecuencias de la sociaiizacion familiar en la cultura espahola [Consequences of the family socialization in the Spanish culture]. Psicothema, 16, 297-302.

Quoss, B., 8c Zhao, W. (1995). Parenting styles and children's satisfaction with parenting in China and the United States. Journal of Comparative Family Studies, 26, 265-280.

Rohner, R. P., 8c Khaleque, A. (2005). Handbook for the study of parental acceptance and rejection (4th Edition). Storrs, CT: Rohner Research Publications.

Rohner, R. P., 8c Pettengill, S. M. (1985). Perceived parental acceptance-rejection and parental control among Korean adolescents. Child Development, 56, 524-528.

Rohner, R. P. (1990). Handbook for the study of parental acceptance and rejection (3rd Edition). Storrs, CT: Rohner Research Publications.

Smetana, J. G. (1995). Parenting styles and conceptions of parental authority during adolescence. Child Development, 66, 299-315.

Steinberg, L, Mounts, N. S., Lamborn, S. D., 8c Dornbusch, S. M. (1991) Authoritative parenting and adolescent adjustment across varied ecological niches. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 1,19-36.

Steinberg, L., Dornbusch, S. M., 8c Brown, B. B. (1992). Ethnic differences in adolescent achievement: An ecological perspective. American Psychologist, 47, 723-729.

Steinberg, L., Lamborn, S., Darling, N., Mounts, N., 8c Dornbusch, S. M. (1994). Over-time changes in adjustment and competence among adolescents from authoritative, authoritarian, indulgent, and neglectful families. Child Development, 65, 754-770.

Tobin, J. J., Wu, D. Y. H., 8c Davidson, D. H. (1989). Preschool in three cultures: Japan, China, and the United States. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

128


Torres-Villa, M. S. (1995). Parenting styles, language and parents1 education as predictors of school achievement for Hispanic students. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Georgia State University, Atlanta.

Triandis, H. C. (1995). Individualism and collectivism. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

Triandis, H. C. (2001). Individualism-collectivism and personality. Journal of Personality, 69, 907-924.

Villalobos, J. A., Cruz, A. V., & Sanchez, P. R. (2004). Estilos parentales y desarrollo psicosocial en estudiantes de Bachillerato [Parental styles and psychosocial development in High-School students]. Revista Mexicana de Psicologia, 21,119-129.

Wang, Q., & Li, J. (2003). Chinese children's self-concepts in the domains of learning and social relations. Psychology in the Schools, 40, 85-101.

Wolfradt, U., Hempel, S., & Miles, J. N. V. (2003). Perceived parenting styles, depersonalisation, anxiety and coping behaviour in adolescents. Personality and Individual Differences, 34, 521-532.

129

ACCEPTANCE: THE ESSENCE OF PEACE

SELECTED PAPERS

FROM

THE FIRST

INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS

ON

INTERPERSONAL

ACCEPTANCE AND REJECTION

FATO$ ERKMAN, EDITOR

AC

CE

PT

AN

CE

: TH

E ESSEN

CE O

F PEA

CE

ACCEPTANCE:

THE ESSENCE OF PEACE

SELECTED PAPERS

FROM THE

FIRST INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS

ON

INTERPERSONAL ACCEPTANCE

AND REJECTION

held in Istanbul, Turkey June, 2006

Edited by Fato§ Erkman

i

^ 1976 V

©2008 Turkish Psychology Association Istanbul Branch

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form or by any means—graphic, electronic, or mechanical, including photocopying, taping, or information storage and retrieval systems — without written permission from the Turkish Psychology Association.

Turkish Psychology Association TPD Istanbul $ubesi Huseyin Aga Mahallesi, Mes/utiyet Cad. No: 10 Galatasaray- istanbul Phone: +90 (212) 251 66 62 - 251 66 61 - 251 7111 e-mail: [email protected] www.psikolog.org

Incekara Press Litros Yolu, Ikinci Matbaalar Sitesi BBIokNo: iBB5 Topkapi, Istanbul, Turkey Phone: +90 (212) 501 08 83

Press Date June 2008

ii

mailto:[email protected]

http://www.psikolog.org

CONTENTS page

R. P. Rohner. Foreword v

F. Erkman. Preface and Acknowledgments VM

Section I. Psychological Adjustment and Clinical Issues

S. A. Rigazio-DiGilio, R. P. Rohner.

Clinical Adaptation of Parental Acceptance-Rejection Theory Questionnaires as Interactive Assessment and Treatment Tools in Relational Therapy

R. Alcazar-Olan.

Patients' Expectations, Perceptions of Their Therapists, and Attendance to Two or More Sessions

A. Alegre, M. Benson.

Parental Acceptance and its Relation to Late Adolescents' Adjustment: The Role of Emotional Intelligence

E. Kross, P. Clasen.

Neural Processes in Rejection Sensitivity: Differences in Emotional Appraisal or Control?

Section II. Family Interaction and Styles of Parenting

B. Yilmaz, F. Erkman.

Understanding Social Anxiety Through Adolescents' Perceptions of Interparental Conflict and Parental Rejection

S. N. Georgiou, C. Constantinides, T. Mouskounti.

Maternal Responsiveness and Child Victimization at School H 97

E. Gracia.

What is Best for Your Children? Authoritative vs. Indulgent Parenting Styles and Psychological Adjustment of Spanish Adolescents

iii

113

Section III. Resilience and Coping with Perceived Rejection

I. Lavi, M. Slone.

Parental Warmth, Parental Control, and Child Resilience: Cross-Cultural Aspects

O. Ayduk, A. Gyurak.

Cognitive Inhibitory Control As A Buffer Against Rejection Sensitivity

Section IV. Comparative Studies of Parental Acceptance-Rejection

A. Khaleque, R. P. Rohner, Z. Nahar.

Agreement Between Children's and Mothers' Perceptions of Maternal Acceptance-Rejection: A Comparative Study of Mothers and Children in Bangladesh and Bangladeshi Immigrant Mothers and Children in the United States

H.Barry, III.

Six Cultural Customs Associated with Gentle Affection for Children.

R. A. Ahmed.

Review of Arab Research on Parental Acceptance-Rejection

A. Khaleque, R. P. Rohner, Z. Nahar, A. H. Sharif.

Acculturation and Perceived Parental Acceptance-Rejection and Control of Bangladeshi Immigrant Children and Parents in America

H. K. L Fente, I. N. Singh.

Cognitive Styles in Relation to Perceived Parental Rejection and Warmth Across Patrilineal and Matrilineal Cultures

Section V. Methodological Issues

S. Keskin, F. Erkman.

Validity, Reliability, And Partial Norm Study Of The Turkish Teacher's Acceptance-Rejection/Control Questionnaire: Child,-Short Form

133

157

175

187

201

225

237

257

iv

Foreword

It gives me great pleasure to be able to write this Foreword to Acceptance: The Essence of Peace, Selected Papers From the First International Congress on Interpersonal Acceptance and Rejection held in Istanbul, Turkey, from June 22-24, 2006. Approximately 200 researchers and practitioners from 36 nations participated in the Congress. The chapters in this volume represent a sampling of the papers given at that Congress. It was also at that Congress where the International Society for Interpersonal Acceptance and Rejection was founded. There I had the great honor of being elected the first President.

At those meetings, delegates also voted to accept the following Mission Statement of the Society: The purpose of the Society is to support and encourage research and practice related to issues of interpersonal acceptance and rejection, including but not limited to parental acceptance-rejection, peer acceptance-rejection, acceptance-rejection in intimate adult relationships, and acceptance-rejection in other attachment relationships throughout the lifespan. Researchers and practitioners in any discipline from any part of the world who subscribe to the mission statement are encouraged to join the Society. Membership information is given on the Society's website at www.isiparweb.org.

Following those early, vibrant beginnings, the Society has begun publishing a newly created Newsletter called Interpersonal Acceptance. Currently the Newsletter has a growing worldwide readership of about 1,700 people. You are invited to access it at the ISIPAR website noted above. If you want to receive Interpersonal Acceptance on a regular basis, please ask the Editor to include your email address on the permanent distribution list. Please know, too, that you are invited to become an active contributor to the Newsletter. It is our intention to use Interpersonal Acceptance as a major forum for exchanging and disseminating information about interpersonal acceptance and rejection.

Beyond this—in recognition of the universal importance of interpersonal acceptance-rejection in human life—I must mention that the University of Connecticut (USA) authorized creation in 2007 of the University of Connecticut Rohner Center Awards for Distinguished Contributions to Theory, Research, and Practice on Interpersonal Acceptance and Rejection. We plan to present every two years at the biennial meetings of the Society two Awards of US$ 1,000 each. One Award is to be given to the author of the Outstanding Paper of the Biennium. The second Award is to be given to the author of the

V

http://www.isiparweb.org

Outstanding Paper by an Early Career Professional. Both Awards are intended to encourage and recognize exceptional contributions to the field of interpersonal acceptance and rejection. Researchers, scholars, and practitioners worldwide are encouraged to submit theory, research, or practice-based manuscripts on any topic dealing with interpersonal acceptance-rejection, as described above in the Society's Mission Statement. Complete information about the Awards and application process are provided in the Society's website.

Warm regards,

Ronald P. Rohner President, ISIPAR

vi

Preface

In June, 2006, the first International Congress on Interpersonal Acceptance and Rejection was held in Istanbul, Turkey. The conference was a much-deserved celebration of Parental Acceptance-Rejection Theory fathered by Ronald P. Rohner, but now owned by many researchers and practitioners worldwide. Keynote Addresses at the conference were given by Ronald P. Rohner on the "Worldwide Effects of Perceived Interpersonal Acceptance-Rejection" and by Cigdem Kagitcibasi on "Parenting and the Development of the Autonomous-Related Self in Cultural Context".

In this book of selected papers from the inaugural conference readers will find papers on topics ranging from rejection sensitivity to maternal responsiveness, and child victimization in school, to resilience of children. This diversity of topics reflects the wide applicability of the theory as well as the way in which the phenomenon of "acceptance" comes up in every aspect of human interpersonal existence. The selected papers are presented in five sections, namely: Psychological Adjustment and Clinical Issues, Family Interaction and Styles of Parenting, Resilience and Coping with Perceived Rejection, Comparative Studies of Parental Acceptance-Rejection, and Methodological Issues.

The Istanbul Branch of the Turkish Psychology Association (TPA) and Ayla Donmez, President at the time, had the vision to initiate the organization of the inaugural conference in Istanbul, even though there were very limited resources. Yet with the participation of professionals from thirty-six countries bringing high quality presentations, the conference opened a new venue in the field of interpersonal acceptance and rejection. At the close of the conference the participants voted to establish the International Society for Interpersonal Acceptance and Rejection.

The Ronald and Nancy Rohner Center for the Study of Interpersonal Acceptance and Rejection at the University of Connecticut provided the initial push for the conference by contributing seed money. Many people, including the reviewers who helped select papers, contributed to the preparation of the conference and thus to the present volume. Special

VII

thanks go to Nancy Rohner who spent days and nights formatting this volume for publication, as well as designing the cover. Additionally, the volume has become a reality thanks to support provided by the present TPA Istanbul Branch President, Zeynep Aycan, and the Turkish Psychology Association. Finally, many special thanks go to the authors of these papers for entrusting their work to us, and for working with us throughout the process leading to publication.

Fato$ Erkman Editor

VIII

what is best for your children? authoritative vs ... · what is best for your children?...

Documents