Effects of Preschool Parents' Power Assertive Patterns and Practices on Adolescent Development
Effects of Preschool Parents' Power Assertive Patterns and Practices on Adolescent Development
复制标题
DOI：
10.1080/15295190903290790
复制
发表时间：
2010-01-01
影响因子：
2.2
通讯作者：
Owens, Elizabeth B.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Baumrind, Diana;Larzelere, Robert E.;Owens, Elizabeth B.
目标。作者调查了学龄前父母权威模式对青少年能力和情绪健康的影响，并区分了对抗性和强制性的权力主张实践，这在一定程度上解释了学龄前模式的不同长期影响。设计。参与者是87个家庭，最初研究时孩子是学龄前学生，结果在青春期早期进行评估。家庭来源于Baumrind的家庭社会化和发展能力纵向研究计划。作者使用全面的观察和采访数据来测试假设，这些假设将学龄前权力主张实践和父母权威模式与儿童青少年时期的属性联系起来。以人为中心的分析对比了青少年的属性与7种学龄前父母权威模式的关系。作者使用以变量为中心的分析来调查5种强制性权力主张做法的不同影响，他们假设这些做法是独裁的、有害的，以及2种对抗性做法(行为控制和规范性打屁股)，他们假设这些做法既不是独裁的，也不是有害的。结果。父母被归类为指令性、民主性或权威性(归类为平衡承诺)的青少年，与父母归类为专制、放任或脱离(归类为不平衡-未承诺)的青少年相比，学龄前学生有能力且适应良好。来自专制家庭的青少年明显不称职，不适应环境。以变量为中心的分析表明，言语敌意和心理控制是威权主义特有的强制性权力主张做法中最有害的。严厉的体罚和武断的纪律也是威权主义的--与众不同且有害。规范的体罚和对抗性的纪律都不是。前沿性管教和成熟度要求对权威性父母教养的有效性有贡献，而规范性体罚的影响是中性的。结论。这些发现将威权主义教育的一贯负面结果和权威和类似权威的父母教育的积极结果扩展到控制孩子最初差异的10年结果。不同的结果可以部分归因于威权父母的强制性做法与权威父母的对抗性做法。
Objective. The authors investigated the effects of preschool patterns of parental authority on adolescent competence and emotional health and differentiated between confrontive and coercive power-assertive practices which accounted partially for differential long-term effects of the preschool patterns. Design. Participants were 87 families initially studied when children were preschool students, with outcomes assessed during early adolescence. Families were drawn from Baumrind's Family Socialization and Developmental Competence longitudinal program of research. The authors used comprehensive observational and interview data to test hypotheses relating preschool power-assertive practices and patterns of parental authority to the children's attributes as adolescents. Person-centered analyses contrasted adolescent attributes associated with 7 preschool patterns of parental authority. The authors used variable-centered analyses to investigate the differential effects of 5 coercive power-assertive practices that they hypothesized were authoritarian-distinctive and detrimental and 2 confrontive practices (behavioral control and normative spanking) that they hypothesized were neither authoritarian-distinctive nor detrimental. Results. Adolescents whose parents were classified as directive, democratic, or authoritative (grouped as balanced-committed) when these adolescents were preschool students were competent and well-adjusted relative to adolescents whose parents were classified as authoritarian, permissive, or disengaged (grouped as imbalanced-uncommitted). Adolescents from authoritarian families were notably incompetent and maladjusted. Variable-centered analyses indicated verbal hostility and psychological control were the most detrimental of the authoritarian-distinctive coercive power-assertive practices. Severe physical punishment and arbitrary discipline were also authoritarian-distinctive and detrimental. Normative physical punishment and confrontive discipline were neither. Confrontive discipline and maturity demands contributed to authoritative parenting's effectiveness, whereas normative physical punishment was neutral in its effects. Conclusions. The findings extend the consistently negative outcomes of authoritarian parenting and positive outcomes of authoritative and authoritative-like parenting to 10-year outcomes that control for initial child differences. Differential outcomes can be partially attributed to the coercive practices of authoritarian parents versus the confrontive practices of authoritative parents.