The multiple-forms approach to control.




Scholars have always deemed control to be fundamental in the parenting context, but its characterization has changed over time. Early scholars defined control in terms of pressure, intrusiveness, and domination, viewing it as detrimental to children. At the same time, however, they acknowledged that it was also maladaptive for parents to allow children free rein, as children require some guidance. In contrast, contemporary work has focused on multiple forms of control, some of which are characterized not by pressure, intrusiveness, or domination, but rather by guidance as well as other characteristics. We refer to this framework as the multiple-forms approach. Schaefer was one of the first to identify more than one form of parental control. His circumplex model included psychological control versus autonomy as well as what he labeled firm versus lax control. He defined a continuum of psychological control versus autonomy; psychological control included the presence of parental dominance, aggression, rejection, and capricious discipline, whereas autonomy was defined as the absence of such characteristics. Firm versus lax control included the absence versus presence of permitting extreme independence (e.g., allowing children to go anyplace they like without asking) and lax discipline (e.g., letting children get away without doing the work they have been told to do). Although the dimension of firm versus lax control may have appeared to be new, it was present in earlier depictions of parenting, albeit not as a distinct dimension of control. For example, Symonds advocated that parents avoid being excessively submissive to children, and Baldwin argued that a key aspect of the democratic parenting style was providing children with rules and regulations for their protection. Continuing the trend of distinguishing among multiple forms of control, Baumrind delineated a variety of forms of control. Echoing Schaefer’s psychological control versus autonomy, Baumrind characterized authoritarianism as including, among other things, parents not sharing decision-making power with children, assuming a stance of personal infallibility, and becoming inaccessible when displeased. Similar to Schaefer’s firm versus lax control, firm enforcement involved such practices as requiring children to pay attention, not being coerced by children, and enforcing compliance after initial noncompliance. Baumrind also focused on parents’ encouragement of independence and individuality. Her work suggested that authoritative parenting, characterized by high firm enforcement, high encouragement of independence and individuality, and low hostility, was beneficial for children. In contrast, authoritarian (high firm enforcement, low encouragement of independence and individuality, and high hostility) and permissive (low firm enforcement, high encouragement of independence and individuality, and low hostility) parenting appeared to be detrimental.

In more contemporary work, Steinberg and colleagues used the term psychological autonomy granting to denote the extent to which parents employ non-coercive democratic discipline and encourage children to express their individuality—akin to Baumrind’s encouragement of independence and individuality. Drawing from this work as well as Schaefer’s, Barber defined psychological control as parents’ ‘‘attempts to intrude on the psychological and emotional development of the child (e.g., thinking processes, self-expression, and attachment to the parent)’’. Scholars frequently define such control as parents’ love withdrawal and guilt induction.when children disobey. Psychological control predicts heightened internalizing symptoms and other psychological problems among children. In their work on parenting, Steinberg and colleagues described another form of control that included monitoring of and setting limits on children’s behavior, which these investigators termed strictness-supervision. Barber labeled such parenting behavioral control, which he described as parents’ ‘‘attempt to manage or control children’s behavior". Barber, as well as others, operationalized behavioral control as parents’ monitoring of children’s behavior outside of the home (e.g., how much parents try to know where their children are after school); scholars have also operationalized such control as parents’ involvement in making decisions for children. Behavioral control predicts decreased externalizing symptoms and increased achievement among children.


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Core Dimensions of Parenting.

Image
 Over the past several decades, parenting researchers have repeatedly suggested that three dimensions can be considered as a set of core features of parenting style . These are warmth versus rejection, structure versus chaos, and autonomy support versus coercion. As can be seen in the historical overview in Table 1, these dimensions have appeared in assessments of parenting for children from preschool age to late adolescence and have been tapped using a variety of methods, most notably parent- and child-report questionnaires, but also including open-ended interviews, rating scales, and observations in vivo and in the laboratory. Indeed, these very three features of parenting, referred to as Acceptance versus Rejection , Firm Control versus Lax Control , and Autonomy versus  help and attention , or it can be initiated by the parent, independent of the child’s behavior.   Structure and chaos . When it first appeared in the parenting literature in discussions of disciplin...
Read more

Focus on the impact of Cultural influences.

 Authoritarian parentin g is widespread in non-Western cultures and among lower socioeconomic status (SES) and ethnic/racial minority parents in the U.S. Moreover, these factors may converge, as immigrant and ethnic minority families often live in poor communities characterized by dangerous neighborhoods, where authoritarian parenting may have protective effects . This has led to questions about whether authoritarian parenting is necessarily maladaptive in some contexts and to the claim that parenting must be assessed in terms of particular cultural values and indigenous concepts . For instance, although Chinese parenting is often described as authoritarian, punitive, and reflecting Confucian, child-centered, and beneficial concerns with strictness and child training. Chinese mothers also have been popularly described as “tiger moms” who employ fierce discipline to facilitate achievement and development.  Careful empirical research does not support this view, however. Per...
Read more

Focus on the Dimensional approaches on Parenting.

In response to the cultural critiques of parenting styles , current research focuses on discrete dimensions of parenting , providing greater specificity in understanding parenting effects. For instance, behavioral control has been distinguished from psychological control and parental knowledge .  Psychological control  Psychological control, which is characteristic of authoritarian parenting , includes parental intrusiveness, guilt induction, and love withdrawal and is associated across cultures with internalizing and externalizing problems. Barber and his colleagues have identified parental disrespect as the specific mechanism causing these negative effects and have demonstrated that disrespect accounts for more of the variance in maladjustment than psychological control, broadly measured. Other than agreeableness, there is little evidence that personality variables moderate associations between psychological control and problem behavior. Drawing on self-determination theor...
Read more