- Email: [email protected]
Externalizing and internalizing behaviours in adolescence, and the importance of parental behavioural and psychological control practices
Journal of Adolescence 60 (2017) 104e113
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Journal of Adolescence journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jado
Externalizing and internalizing behaviours in adolescence, and the importance of parental behavioural and psychological control practices Maria Symeou*, Stelios Georgiou University of Cyprus, Department of Psychology, Nicosia, Cyprus
a r t i c l e i n f o
a b s t r a c t
Article history: Received 12 July 2016 Received in revised form 24 May 2017 Accepted 12 July 2017
The aims of the present study were to explore the impact of parental characteristics (behavioural control and psychological control) on adolescents' expression of externalizing and internalizing behaviours. To address the aim of the study, participants completed quantitative measures; the study included 538 adolescents and their mothers and fathers. Overall, 513 mothers and 464 fathers participated in the study. Adolescents completed the Children's Report on Parent Behaviour Inventory (CRPBI), while parents completed the Child Behaviour Checklist e Parent Report (Short Form; CBCL). Results of the study showed that only maternal and paternal psychological control predicted externalizing and internalizing behaviours. The conclusions have practical applications, as they can provide novel approaches in parent training programmes. Furthermore, results are discussed in relation to the connection with earlier studies and the theoretical contribution. © 2017 The Foundation for Professionals in Services for Adolescents. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Externalizing behaviours Internalizing behaviours Behavioural control Psychological control Adolescence Parental practices
1. Introduction An important differentiation in child psychology is the separation between ‘externalizing’ and ‘internalizing’ disorders (Achenbach, 1978). Externalizing behaviours (EBs) refer to behaviour problems that are evident in children's outward behaviour, such as rule-breaking actions, aggression and delinquency. Because of the immediate and long-term negative effects associated with those behaviours, they are considered as highly problematic for society; longitudinal research shows that an adolescent's EBs are a risk factor for numerous negative outcomes, such as juvenile delinquency, future crime and violence (cited in Liu, 2004) and decreased educational and occupational attainment in adulthood (Tanner, Davis, & O'Grady, 1999). Alternatively, internalizing behaviours (IBs) refer to behaviour problems that are inner-directed and overcontrolled (Madigan, Atkinson, Laurin, & Benoit, 2013). In other words, IBs affect the individual's psychological world (Liu, 2004). People who experience IBs present symptoms related to social isolation, withdrawal, anxiety and depression (Madigan et al., 2013; Williams & Kelly, 2005). IBs are linked to less positive adjustment in adulthood (cited in Hamza & Willoughby, 2011), lower levels of self-esteem and self-efficacy (Kerr & Stattin, 2000), poor academic achievement, suicidal behaviours or ideation during adolescence and attempted suicide and completed suicide in adulthood (cited in Plunkett, Henry, Robinson, Behnke, &
* Corresponding author. Department of Psychology, University of Cyprus, P.O. Box 20537, CY 1678, Nicosia, Cyprus. E-mail address: [email protected] (M. Symeou). http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2017.07.007 0140-1971/© 2017 The Foundation for Professionals in Services for Adolescents. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
M. Symeou, S. Georgiou / Journal of Adolescence 60 (2017) 104e113
105
Falcon , 2007). Accordingly, given the short-term and long-term consequences of EB/IB, researchers have recognized the significance of understanding the nature of these behaviours. Within research on the parameters of EB/IB, investigation of interpersonal factors, such as parental factors, is often included,. For instance, negative parenting practices are considered to be important factors affecting the development of EB/ IB. Additionally, both parents are now considered as important figures in the exhibition of EB/IB, even though the contribution of the father has been largely underestimated. Socialization researchers have long showed considerable interest in the way in which parents supervise and regulate the behaviour of their children. Within the literature, the terms parental ‘behavioural control’ and parental ‘psychological control’ have been used to describe such parenting behaviours and styles (Pettit, Laird, Dodge, Bates, & Criss, 2001). Behavioural control (BC) refers to practices that aim to regulate children's behaviours to be consistent with established family or social norms (Barber, 1996) and involves clear and consistent rules, supervision and management of behaviour. Conversely, psychological control (PC) refers to parental control of the child's or adolescent's psychological world, wherein parents are, usually, non-responsive to the youngster's psychological and emotional needs. Essentially, it refers to control attempts (e.g., love withdrawal, devaluation, guilt induction) that ‘constrain, invalidate, and manipulate a child's psychological and emotional experience and expression’ (Barber, 1996) by keeping the child emotionally dependent on the parent (Mills & Rubin, 1998). Hence, the two forms of control elucidate important distinctions in their definitions. PC has to do with ‘the relative degree of emotional autonomy that the parent allows’, whereas BC has to do with ‘the level of monitoring and limit setting that the parent uses’ (Gray & Steinberg, 1999). At the heart of the distinction between the two terms is the notion that they affect individuals in different ways. As far as BC is concerned with behavioural supervision, regulation and management, it is thought to serve a positive socializing function. In contrast, PC refers to control attempts that interfere with an adolescent's need for independence, and it is thought to impede the development of autonomy and self-direction (Barber, 1996; Steinberg, 1990). Indeed, studies have found differential associations of parenting with adolescent EB and IB (e.g., Galambos, Barker, & Almeida, 2003; Gray & Steinberg, 1999; Hoeve et al., 2009; Pettit et al., 2001). Behavioural undercontrol has been directly linked with EB, such as substance use, antisocial behaviour, delinquency and sexual precocity (Barber, 1996; Barber, Olsen, & Shagle, 1994; Galambos et al., 2003; Mills & Rubin, 1998; Pettit et al., 2001). One explanation for this link may be that uncontrolled environments fail to cultivate self-regulation in children, leaving them more prone to contravene social norms (Barber, 1996). In contrast, PC has been associated to IB, such as depression and a lack of self-confidence (Pettit et al., 2001). For example, Plunkett et al. (2007) found a positive association between parental PC and depressed mood in adolescent boys. One explanation for this association might be that as adolescents experience PC, they may consider their parents as being non-responsive to their emotional and psychological needs, and this encumbers the adolescents' abilities to trust their own uniqueness and ideas (Barber, 1996). Additionally, Mills and Rubin (1998) found links between BC and internalizing symptomatology; from their data, mothers of socially withdrawn children appeared to be behaviourally overcontrolling. Furthermore, there is also evidence to suggest that PC may be related with externalizing symptomatology (Hoeve et al., 2009; Mills & Rubin, 1998; Rogers, Buchanan, & Winchell, 2003). In one study, Cui, Morris, Criss, Houltberg, and Silk (2014) found an indirect predictive association between PC and adolescent aggressiveness. As Mills and Rubin (1998) suggest, PC tactics may lead to aggression by arousing anger. Likewise, Rogers et al. (2003) found that parent-reported EB and IB were predicted by perceived parental PC. Nonetheless, these findings should be interpreted with caution. On the one hand, research demonstrates discrepancies between parental reports €, & Helenius, 1999). As Rogers et al. (2003) argue though, given that, longitudinally, and youth self-reports (Sourander, Helstela links between IB and PC emerged primarily with adolescent reports, this might designate that links between IB and PC is, in fact, in the mind of the adolescent due to a negative cognitive bias. Hence, having parents report on their children's EB and IB and adolescents report their perceptions of their parents' control tactics controls for any response bias. Furthermore, this minimizes the chances that any findings would be due to common source variance. Nevertheless, as BC and PC have only recently been examined as possible determinants of both EB and IB, this makes it difficult to draw any meaningful conclusions. Thus, the present study aims to provide an insight into the ways in which BC and PC are associated with both EB/IB. However, one important issue that arises with parenting research is the systematic neglect and exclusion of fathers from studies of childrens' and adolescents' development. Even though empirical interest in the father-child relationship is noticeably increasing, research often ignores or disregards the importance of fathers, and so fathers are still undervalued in studies of child development (Schacht, Cummings, & Davies, 2009). For example, a meta-analysis concluded that less than 20% of the studies focused on the father figure, even though specific paternal parenting behaviours had a larger effect than maternal parenting behaviours (Hoeve et al., 2009). Likewise, empirical evidence indicates that mothers and fathers may differ in their use of control tactics. This may be for a multitude of reasons. For instance, Barber (1996) concluded that mothers exert higher levels of PC than fathers do; this may be because the mother is usually the primary caretaker with whom adolescents have the most interaction (Rogers et al., 2003). Hence, as the mother is usually more involved in the adolescents' general day-to-day activities (Pleck & Mascaidrelli, 2004), she may be more likely to want to ‘make certain’ that her offspring is well aware of his or her parents' contribution in his or her upbringing. Overall, one should consider such issues as the quantity and quality of the time that fathers and mothers spend with their children and who is considered to be the more dominant parent. Overall though, because fathers have become increasingly more involved in the lives of their children, the inclusion of fathers in parenting research is imperative; doing so, will provide more concrete conclusions on the association between parent practices and adolescent behavioural difficulties (Pleck & Mascaidrelli, 2004). Furthermore, evidence suggests that a
106
M. Symeou, S. Georgiou / Journal of Adolescence 60 (2017) 104e113
positive relationship with the father may shield the child from adversities, even if the mother-child relationship is strained (e.g., Murray, Dwyer, Rubin, Knighton-Wisor, & Booth-LaForce, 2014). More specifically, Murray et al. (2014) found evidence that, for boys, even if mothers exert PC, having a high-quality relationship with their father decreased the risk for EB. This further adds to the importance of examining both parents as significant for the adolescent's behavioural and psychosocial adjustment. Nonetheless, fathers' and mothers' understanding of their adolescent children's behaviour might differ. This might be both for quantitative and qualitative reasons. For instance, as mothers are, comparatively, known to spend quantitatively more time with their offspring, for this reason, they might also be more aware of certain behavioural problems that their adolescent children may be experiencing. To this end, it is essential to consider their viewpoints separately. In consideration of all these points, the present study hypothesizes that (a) BC will significantly negatively predict EB, and (b) PC will significantly positively predict IB. Additionally, the possible predictive relationship of BC to IB and PC to EB will also be examined. Finally, it is anticipated that both mothers and fathers will play a significant role in their adolescents' behavioural and psychosocial well-being.
2. Methods 2.1. Participants For the data collection, 8 secondary schools in Cyprus were randomly chosen: 5 public schools in urban areas, 1 public school in a rural area, 1 private school and 1 technical school. The sample of the study consisted of 538 adolescent students (M ¼ 16.01 years, SD ¼ 0.88 years) who attended the fourth, fifth and sixth grades of secondary school and their mothers and fathers. Approximately 41.1% (N ¼ 221; M ¼ 15.95 years, SD ¼ 0.87 years) of the sample consisted of male adolescent students, and 58.9% (N ¼ 317; M ¼ 16,06 years, SD ¼ 0.88 years) of the sample consisted of female adolescent students (see Table 1). Similar to the official data from the Statistical Service of the Cyprus Government, the majority of adolescent participants were students attending public secondary schools in urban areas, followed by students who attend secondary private schools, secondary technical schools and public secondary schools in rural areas (see Table 2). When the data of the study and the official data from the Statistical Service of the Cyprus Government are compared by gender, they seem to be, for the most part, congruent (CYSTAT for male students: 60.1%, 15.7%, 20.9% and 3.3%, respectively; CYSTAT for female students: 75.1%, 16.9%, 4.2% and 3.9%, respectively). Thus, the present data seems to be representative of the number of students who attend the fourth, fifth and sixth grades of secondary education in Cyprus. Additionally, 977 parents responded positively and completed the questionnaires. More specifically, 86.2% of the fathers and 95.4% of the mothers of the 538 adolescent students returned the questionnaires completed; 464 fathers (M ¼ 47.63 years, SD ¼ 5.10 years) and 513 mothers (M ¼ 44.25 years, SD ¼ 4.73 years). To be included in the analyses, at least one parent was required to have completed the questionnaires. Ergo, for 439 (81.6%) of the adolescent participants, both parents returned their questionnaires completed; for 25 (4.6%) of the adolescents, only their fathers completed their questionnaires and for 74 (13.8%) of the adolescents only their mothers completed the questionnaires.
2.2. Measures
2.2.1. Adolescent data collection 2.2.1.1. Demographic data. Adolescent students were required to give some data in relation to their gender, age and place of residence. 2.2.1.2. Parental control. Adolescents' perceptions of parents' BC and PC were assessed with the Children's Report on Parent Behaviour Inventory (CRPBI; Schludermann & Schludermann, 1988). For the study, only the psychological control/autonomy subscale and firm control/lax control subscale were utilized. The 20 items derived from the two subscales describe the mother and the father separatelydwith pronoun adjustments for gender.
Table 1 Number of adolescent students who participated in the study, according to their gender and grade (percentages in brackets). Grade
Gender
Male Female Total
4th Grade
5th Grade
6th Grade
Total
83 (37.6%) 106 (33.4%) 189 (35.1%)
77 (34.8%) 100 (31.6%) 177 (32.9%)
61 (27.6%) 111 (35%) 172 (32%)
221 (41.1%) 317 (58.9%) 538 (100%)
M. Symeou, S. Georgiou / Journal of Adolescence 60 (2017) 104e113
107
Table 2 Number of adolescent students who participated in the study, according to the type of school they attend (percentages in brackets). Type of school
Gender
Male Female Total
Public school e urban area
Private school
Technical school
Public school e rural area
Total
156 (70.6%) 245 (77.3%) 401 (74.5%)
36 (16.3%) 50 (15.7%) 86 (16%)
19 (8.6%) 11 (3.5%) 30 (5.6%)
10 (4.5%) 11 (3.5%) 21 (3.9%)
221 (41.1%) 317 (58.9%) 538 (100%)
BC was measured using 10 items. Examples of items included in this subscale are: ‘My mother/father believes in having a lot of rules and sticking to them’, and ‘My mother/father gives me as much freedom as I want’ (recoded item). PC tactics were also measured via 10 items; examples of items included are: ‘My mother/father tells me of all the things she/he had done for me’, and ‘My mother/father is less friendly with me if I do not see things her/his way’. Questions were rated on a 5-point Likert-type scale, ranging from ‘never’ (1) to ‘always’ (5) with high scores on each subscale being indicative of high control tactics. The psychometric properties of the CRPBI (Schludermann & Schludermann, 1988) have been supportive (Alderfer et al., 2008), and the subscales demonstrated satisfactory internal consistency values. In a study by Soucy and Larose (2000), the internal consistency values (Cronbach alpha coefficients) of the mother-adolescent and father-adolescent scores for the BC and PC subscales were 0.81, 0.88, 0.81 and 0.85, respectively.
2.2.2. Parental data collection 2.2.2.1. Demographic data. Parents were required to give some data in relation to their gender, age, place of residence and information about their marital status and level of education. 2.2.2.2. Externalizing and internalizing behaviours e short form. To measure EB/IB in adolescence, the school-age version (children ages 4e18) of the Child Behaviour Checklist e Parent Report (Short Form) (CBCL; Achenbach, 1991) was used. The measure is a standardized form consisting of 40 statements that describe the adolescent during the previous six (6) months. Parents or caregivers report on their children's behavioural and emotional problems using a 3-point Likert-type response format (0 ¼ not true, 1 ¼ somewhat or sometimes true, 2 ¼ very true or often true). The 40-item CBCL is made up of five syndrome scales that group into two higher-order factorsdexternalizing and internalizing. The EB domain consists of: ❖ Delinquent behaviour e assessed by nine items e includes lying, cheating, swearing, truancy, stealing, setting fires and vandalism. ❖ Aggressive behaviour e assessed by 10 items e includes bragging, arguing, screaming, showing off, attention-seeking, teasing, being demanding, displaying threatening behaviour and displaying a temper. Alternatively, the IB domain consists of: ❖ Withdrawal symptoms e addressed by 6 items, questions concerning social withdrawal, shyness, staring, sulking and sadness. ❖ Somatic complaints e addressed by 3 items (with one item being further subdivided into 8 subquestions) includes tiredness, nausea, aching, vomiting, headaches, dizziness and complaints about skin, stomach or eye problems; and ❖ Anxious/depressed syndromes e addressed by 12 items, including crying, fear, guilt, loneliness, nervousness, worthlessness and suspiciousness. The CBCL has been widely used (e.g., Buehler, 2006; Georgiou & Fanti, 2014; Rogers et al., 2003) with extensive literature supporting its psychometric integrity (Achenbach, 1991). Validity and reliability for the scale scores have been documented (Achenbach & Rescorla, 2001; Buehler, 2006). In Georgiou and Fanti's (2014) study, the Cronbach's alphas for EB ranged from 0.87 to 0.94 and for IB from 0.83 to 0.92. 2.3. Procedure Eight schools were randomly chosen and asked to participate in the study. Upon agreeing to participate, students were briefly informed of the purposes of the study and were given an envelope containing the questionnaires to be taken home and completed by their parents. One week following the first visitation to the students, student data collection was carried out. Those adolescents whose parents completed their questionnaires were given their own questionnaires to complete. Once all the students completed their questionnaires, they were thanked for their participation and fully debriefed.
108
M. Symeou, S. Georgiou / Journal of Adolescence 60 (2017) 104e113
3. Results 3.1. Reliability analyses The two subscales of the CRPBI demonstrated satisfactory internal consistency values. More specifically, the internal consistency values of the mother-adolescent and father-adolescent scores for the BC and PC subscales were 0.79, 0.81, 0.85 and 0.86, respectively. The a coefficient for the total CRPBI scale was also satisfactory both for mother-adolescent (a ¼ 0.85) and father-adolescent (a ¼ 0.88) reports. With regard to the CBCL, Cronbach's alpha was 0.81 for the mothers' reports of EB and 0.84 for IB; similarly, Cronbach's alpha was 0.81 for the fathers' reports of EB and 0.82 for IB. The a coefficient for the total CBCL scale was also satisfactory both for the mothers' (a ¼ 0.88) and the fathers' reports (a ¼ 0.87). 3.2. Parental level of education Both parents reported on their level of education. Regarding the fathers, 159 graduated from secondary school, 195 completed tertiary education, 91 obtained a master's degree, 7 were holders of a Ph.D., and 3 were not high school graduates. Nine fathers did not provide any information regarding their educational status. Similarly, 138 mothers graduated from secondary school, 259 completed tertiary education, 92 obtained a master's degree, 6 were holders of a Ph.D., and 9 were not high school graduates. Nine mothers did not provide any information regarding their educational status. 3.3. Comparisons between parental-control practices based on adolescents' age A series of multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) were performed to investigate differences in experiences of maternal and paternal BC and PC practices based on the adolescents' age. First, experiences of maternal BC and PC practices for adolescents' age were compared. Results indicated that there was a statistically significant difference between adolescents' age and parental control, F (8, 1054) ¼ 2.45, p ¼ 0.013; Wilks' Lambda ¼ 0.96; partial eta squared ¼ 0.02. When the results for maternal BC and PC were considered separately, the only difference to reach statistical significance, using Bonferroni adjusted alpha levels of 0.025 per test (0.05/2), was BC, F (4, 528) ¼ 3.70, p ¼ 0.006; partial eta squared ¼ 0.03. An inspection of the mean scores indicated that as adolescents' age increased, maternal BC decreased (14 years old: M ¼ 29.33, SD ¼ 1.53; 15 years old: M ¼ 27.33, SD ¼ 6.28; 16 years old: M ¼ 26.87, SD ¼ 6.65; 17 years old: M ¼ 25.58, SD ¼ 6.33; 18 years old: M ¼ 22.00, SD ¼ 6.48). Similarly, a MANOVA was used to compare experiences of paternal BC and PC practices for adolescents' age. There was no statistically significant difference between adolescents' age on experiences of paternal BC and PC, F (8, 1034) ¼ 1.03, p ¼ 0.413; Wilks' Lambda ¼ 0.984; partial eta squared ¼ 0.008. 3.4. Comparisons between maternal and paternal parental control Paired-sample t-tests, using Bonferroni adjusted alpha levels of 0.025 per test (0.05/2), were conducted to compare maternal and paternal parental control. On average, adolescent participants reported that fathers exhibited higher BC (M ¼ 27.52, SD ¼ 7.27) than mothers (M ¼ 26.53, SD ¼ 6.51). This difference was significant (t (518) ¼ 3.53, p < 0.0001) and represented a largeesized effect, r ¼ 0.15. On the contrary, mothers were reported to exhibit higher PC (M ¼ 21.26, SD ¼ 7.40) than fathers (M ¼ 19.53, SD ¼ 7.37). This difference was significant (t (517) ¼ 5.26, p < 0.0001) and represented a largeesized effect, r ¼ 0.22. 3.5. Associations between parent control and externalizing and internalizing behaviours Bivariate correlations between the relevant scales were computed to identify possible associations among parental control tactics and adolescents' exhibition of EB and IB. Results indicated that specific patterns of control tactics were significantly related with EB and IB (see Tables 3 and 4, respectively).
Table 3 Correlation coefficients between mother parental control and externalizing and internalizing behaviours.
Mother behavioural control Mother psychological control M-R externalizing behaviours M-R internalizing behaviours
Mother psychological control
M-R externalizing behaviours
M-R internalizing behaviours
0.37**
0.09* 0.34**
0.00 0.15** 0.46**
Note: *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01; M-R ¼ Mother-Reported.
M. Symeou, S. Georgiou / Journal of Adolescence 60 (2017) 104e113
109
Table 4 Correlation coefficients between father parental control and externalizing and internalizing behaviours.
Father behavioural control Father psychological control F-R externalizing behaviours F-R internalizing behaviours
Father psychological control
F-R externalizing behaviours
F-R internalizing behaviours
0.52**
0.13** 0.29**
0.08 0.21** 0.49**
Note: *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01; F-R ¼ Father-Reported.
3.6. Parental control and externalizing and internalizing behaviours e predictive relationships The hypothesis of the study states that BC will significantly negatively predict EB (and that predictive links to IB will be examined), whereas PC will significantly positively predict IB (and that predictive links to EB will be examined). Hierarchical multiple regression analyses (blockwise entry) were computed to examine the relative contribution of maternal and paternal parental control to adolescent's EB/IB. In hierarchical (blockwise entry) regression, known predictors from past research are entered into the model first. Consequently, in examining EB, BC was entered into the model first, whereas, for IB, PC was entered into the model first. 3.6.1. Externalizing behaviours For mother-reported EB, demographic information was entered in Block 1, explaining of 1.7% the variance of EB (r2 ¼ 0.017, adjusted r2 ¼ 0.000). BC was entered in Block 2, explaining 3% of the variance of EB (r2 ¼ 0.030, adjusted r2 ¼ 0.008). After entry of PC in Block 3, the total variance explained by the model as a whole was 11.6% (r2 ¼ 0.116, adjusted r2 ¼ 0.092), F (11, 412) ¼ 4.92, p < 0.0005. In the final model, only mother PC (b ¼ 0.28, p < 0.0005) was statistically significant. ВC or father PC did not significantly predict EB. For father-reported EB, demographic information was entered in Block 1, explaining the 2% the variance of EB (r2 ¼ 0.020, adjusted r2 ¼ 0.004). ВC was entered in Block 2, explaining 3.7% of the variance of EB (r2 ¼ 0.037, adjusted r2 ¼ 0.016). After entry of PC in Block 3, the total variance explained by the model as a whole was 13% (r2 ¼ 0.130, adjusted r2 ¼ 0.107), F (11, 413) ¼ 5.60, p < 0.0005. In the final model, only PC (father: b ¼ 0.17, p < 0.05; mother: b ¼ 0.23, p < 0.0005) was statistically significant in predicting EB. BC did not reach statistical significance (see Tables 5 and 6, respectively). 3.6.2. Internalizing behaviours For mother-reported IB, demographic information was entered in Block 1, explaining 5.2% of the variance of IB (r2 ¼ 0.052, adjusted r2 ¼ 0.036). PC was entered in Block 2, explaining 5.8% of the variance of IB (r2 ¼ 0.058, adjusted r2 ¼ 0.062). After entry of BC in Block 3, the total variance explained by the model as a whole was 8.8% (r2 ¼ 0.088, adjusted r2 ¼ 0.064), F (11, 414) ¼ 3.63, p < 0.0005. In the final model, only mother PC (b ¼ 0.14, p < 0.05) was statistically significant in predicting IB. BC or father PC did not reach statistical significance. For father-reported IB, demographic data was entered in Block 1, explaining 5.9% of the variance of IB (r2 ¼ 0.059, adjusted r2 ¼ 0.043). PC was entered in Block 2, explaining 10.9% of the variance of IB (r2 ¼ 0.109, Adjusted r2 ¼ 0.089). After entry of BC in Block 3, the total variance explained by the model as a whole was 10.9% (r2 ¼ 0.109, adjusted r2 ¼ 0.085), F (11, 411) ¼ 4.56, p < 0.0005. In the final model, only one predictordfather PC (b ¼ 0.19, p < 0.05) dwas statistically significant. BC or mother PC did not significantly predict father-reported IB (see Tables 7 and 8, respectively). Overall, the results demonstrate that PC is an important factor in predicting an adolescent's expression of both EB/IB. In other words, the more PC parents employ, the more EB or IB the adolescents exhibit. BC was not found to predict either EB nor IB. Table 5 Hierarchical regression analyses predicting adolescent's mother-reported externalizing behaviours from parental control. Dependent
Predictors
Mother-reported externalizing behaviours
Block 1 Age Gender Grade Mother's Marital Status Mother's Educational Level Father's Marital Status Father's Educational Level Block 2 Mother Behavioural Control Father Behavioural Control Block 3 Mother Psychological Control Father Psychological Control
Note: *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01.
b
DR2 0.017
0.06 0.00 0.02 0.04 0.12 0.02 0.02 0.030 0.06 0.03 0.115 0.28** 0.08
110
M. Symeou, S. Georgiou / Journal of Adolescence 60 (2017) 104e113
Table 6 Hierarchical regression analyses predicting adolescent's father-reported externalizing behaviours from parental control. Dependent
Predictors
Father-reported externalizing behaviours
Block 1 Age Gender Grade Mother's Marital Status Mother's Educational Level Father's Marital Status Father's Educational Level Block 2 Mother Behavioural Control Father Behavioural Control Block 3 Mother Psychological Control Father Psychological Control
b
D R2 0.020
0.09 0.02 0.11 0.03 0.15 0.01 0.02 0.037 0.07 0.03 0.130 0.23** 0.17*
Note: *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01.
4. Discussion The present study aimed to provide an understanding of how certain hypothesized parental factorsdBC and PCdmay influence the development of EB/IB. The analyses yielded mixed findings. The hypothesis of the study was partially supported. Consistent with the formulated hypothesis, it was found that psychological control was associated with adolescents' exhibition of IB. This finding is in agreement with previous studies (e.g., Hoeve et al., 2009; Plunkett et al., 2007; Rogers et al., 2003) that concluded that PC is associated with internalizing symptomatology (Pettit et al., 2001; Plunkett et al., 2007; Wei & Kendall, 2014). Thus, it was not unusual to find that PC tactics were associated with EB/IB in the present study as well. Adolescents experiencing parental PC may perceive their parents as undermining their need for autonomy and, thus, feel unable to trust their own abilities and uniqueness (Barber, 1996). Even though parental use of PC accounted for 8.2%e10.9% of the variance in IB, these figures are similar to previous research (e.g., Finkenauer, Engels, & Baumeister, 2005; Galambos et al., 2003). The small portions of variance suggest that it might be fruitful to consider a broader array of parenting predictors, such as attachment, child disclosure and parent-child conflict. One other important finding was the positive association between parental PC and EB. Even though externalizing symptomatology traditionally has more prominent empirical associations to BC, some researchers also support the linkage between PC and EB (e.g., Cui et al., 2014; Hoeve et al., 2009; Rogers et al., 2003), and the present study provides further support of this proposition. PC accounted for 11.5%e13% of the variance in EB. Again, despite the small portions of variance, these figures are similar to previous research using pre-adolescent and young adolescent samples (e.g., Finkenauer et al., 2005; Hoeve et al., 2009). How do PC tactics relate to the exhibition of EB? PC tactics may lead to aggressive behaviours by arousing anger (Mills & Rubin, 1998). In regards to BC, it is argued that under-controlled environments are predictive of more EB than their counterparts whose parents practice BC tactics. Thus, the finding of the present study was unexpected, as it contradicts previous research, wherein BC has been linked with EB (Barber et al., 1994; Galambos et al., 2003; Pettit et al., 2001), and with IB (Mills & Rubin, 1998; Wei & Kendall, 2014). All in all, the findings suggest that PC is important in determining youths' exhibition of EB/IB. It seems that adolescence is a fundamental period in developing self-sufficiency and independence, and so, any tactics that go against those needs corrode self-perception and negatively influence inward and outward behaviours. Even though mothers are traditionally considered as the primary caregivers of their children (Bowlby, 1973), an important finding of this study was that both parents were significant in determining the degree to which their adolescent children would display EB and/or IB. This finding is important, as it further supports the inclusion of fathers both in the applied and in the research setting. 4.1. Contribution of the study A contribution of the study is the fact that specific findings challenge previously established conclusions. For example, BC was traditionally associated with EB, whereas PC was associated with IB. However, our results indicated that, for mid-to-late adolescents, BC is not related to EB, while PC was related to both EB/IB. Thus, conclusions of the present study have practical applications because they can provide novel approaches in parent training programmes. For example, prevention and intervention methods can benefit from the findings that PC is strongly related to EB/IB and that both parents are important for the well-being of their child. Hence, parenting-skills training programmes should encourage both parents to be positively involved in their child's life. One other important contribution of the present research is the inclusion of fathers in the study. Due to the fact that inclusion of fathers in research concerning children's and adolescent's development within multiple family contexts is often
M. Symeou, S. Georgiou / Journal of Adolescence 60 (2017) 104e113
111
Table 7 Hierarchical regression analyses predicting adolescent's mother-reported internalizing behaviours from parental control. Dependent
Predictors
Mother-reported internalizing behaviours
Block 1 Age Gender Grade Mother's Marital Status Mother's Educational Level Father's Marital Status Father's Educational Level Block 2 Mother Psychological Control Father Psychological Control Block 3 Mother Behavioural Control Father Behavioural Control
b
DR2 0.052
0.10 0.22 0.03 0.04 0.08 0.02 0.01 0.082 0.14* 0.08 0.088 0.11 0.05
Note: *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01.
Table 8 Hierarchical regression analyses predicting adolescent's father-reported internalizing behaviours from parental control. Dependent
Predictors
Father-reported internalizing behaviours
Block 1 Age Gender Grade Mother's Marital Status Mother's Educational Level Father's Marital Status Father's Educational Level Block 2 Mother Psychological Control Father Psychological Control Block 3 Mother Behavioural Control Father Behavioural Control
b
DR2 0.059
0.13 0.20 0.12 0.25 0.10 0.13 0.04 0.109 0.07 0.19* 0.109 0.01 0.01
Note: *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01.
neglected, meaningful conclusions regarding parental importance as a whole are difficult to draw. Nonetheless, both mothers and fathers were found to be important in determining the degree to which EB/IB would be experienced. Further strengths of the study include the exploration of age differences and comparisons between maternal and paternal parental control. An important finding is that experiences of maternal BC differ for adolescents of different ages; more specifically, mothers exert more BC tactics when their children are in their mid-adolescent period, but reduce their limitsetting for adolescents who are close to reaching adulthood. This finding highlights the importance of considering one's age in concluding about certain associations. Finally, quantitative data were gathered from three main informantsdthe adolescents, and their fathers and mothers. Parents reported on their children's behavioural and emotional problems, whereas adolescents reported their perceptions of their parents' BC and PC tactics. This way, response bias (e.g., social desirability; parents providing misinformation in regards to their control tactics in a way that will be considered more favorable by researchers) was controlled. Furthermore, using multi-informants minimizes the chances that any statistical findings would be due to common source variance. In addition, using multiple informants regarding the same topic (such as, for example, both parents providing data on their children's EB/ IB) increases the reliability and credibility of that particular measurement. 4.2. Limitations of the present study and recommendations for further research Several limitations of the present study should be noted. First of all, the findings of the present study cannot be generalized to children of all ages. Accordingly, other life periods could provide a different picture of the relationship between parental control and EB/IB. Additionally, one other limitation of the present study is the reliance on adolescents as the only reporter of their parents' control tactics. The fact is that by having solely one informant, that informant may not respond objectively. Consequently, inaccurate responding may produce misleading results or ambiguous important relationships between variables. Likewise, having parents report on the adolescents' experiences of EB/IB may also be a limitation of the study. Even though the CBCL is considered one of the most well-known measures of identifying problem behaviours, the reliance on solely parent reports for
112
M. Symeou, S. Georgiou / Journal of Adolescence 60 (2017) 104e113
identifying behavioural difficulties in adolescents may be erroneous. Research demonstrates the existence of discrepancies between parent reports and youth self-reports, with the youth reporting greater internalizing symptoms (Sourander et al., 1999). Furthermore, due to the unidimensional, cross-sectional nature of the data, the direction of the theorized effects of parental control on EB/IB cannot be confirmed. It is possible that the direction is actually reverse; for example, considering PC, parents who perceive their children as exhibiting EB or IB may increase their attempts to shape the personality of their child through PC tactics. Taking these drawbacks into consideration, future research should aim to address these limitations. First and foremost, it is essential to include multiple informants regarding each variable of interest. Also, future research should consider the limitations of cross-sectional designs. Instead, using longitudinal data provides additional information concerning changes in the associations over time. Furthermore, application of transactional models would be helpful in answering questions about reciprocal effects between adolescents and their parents. In addition to the above, future research should also focus on examining the moderation role of an adolescent's age in the relationship between parental control and the exhibition of EB and IB. Lastly, research has consistently indicated that children and adolescents whose parents employ negative rearing practices are more prone to expressing EB/IB. Nevertheless, some individuals exposed to these adverse parenting practices are able to develop with few, if any, difficulties. What is it about some children that allow them to function well despite their adversity? Researchers have considered resilience as one factor that helps children overcome their negative experiences with their parents; a dynamic process wherein an individual displays positive adaptation despite experiences of significant adversity or trauma (Luthar, Cichetti, & Becker, 2000). Future research should also focus on exploring the moderating effect of protective factors, such as resilience, in the relationship between parental control and adolescents' EB/IB. Establishing such moderation effects has potential practical implications for social-skills prevention and intervention programmes designed to boost social competence.
References Achenbach, T. M. (1978). The child behavior profile: I. Boys aged 6-11. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 46, 478e488. Achenbach, T. M. (1991). Manual for the child behavior Checklist/4-18 and 1991 profile. Burlington, VT: University of Vermont, Department of Psychiatry. Achenbach, T. M., & Rescorla, L. A. (2001). Manual for the ASEBA school-age forms & profiles. Burlington, VT: University of Vermont, Research Center for Children, Youth, & Families. Alderfer, M. A., Fiese, B. H., Gold, J. I., Cutuli, J. J., Holmbeck, G. N., Goldbeck, L., et al. (2008). Evidence-based assessment in pediatric psychology: Family measures. Journal of Pediatric Psychology, 33(9), 1046e1061. Barber, B. K. (1996). Parental psychological control: Revisiting a neglected construct. Child Development, 67, 3296e3319. Barber, B. K., Olsen, J. E., & Shagle, S. C. (1994). Associations between parental psychological and behavioral control and youth internalized and externalized behaviors. Child Development, 65, 1120e1136. Bowlby, J. (1973). Attachment and loss, vol. 2: Separation. New York: Basic Books. Buehler, C. (2006). Parents and peers in relation to early adolescent problem behavior. Journal of Marriage and Family, 68, 109e124. Cui, L., Morris, A. S., Criss, M. M., Houltberg, B. J., & Silk, J. S. (2014). Parental psychological control and adolescent adjustment: The role of adolescent emotion regulation. Parenting: Science and Practice, 14(1), 47e67. Finkenauer, C., Engels, R. C. M. E., & Baumeister, R. F. (2005). Parenting behavior and adolescent behavioural and emotional problems: The role of selfcontrol. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 29(1), 58e69. Galambos, N. L., Barker, E. T., & Almeida, D. M. (2003). Parents do matter: Trajectories of change in externalizing and internalizing problems in early adolescence. Child Development, 74(2), 578e594. Georgiou, S. N., & Fanti, K. A. (2014). Transactional associations between mother-child conflict and child externalising and internalising problems. Educational Psychology, 34(2), 133e153. Gray, M. G., & Steinberg, L. (1999). Unpacking authoritative parenting: Reassessing a multidimensional construct. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 61, 574e587. Hamza, C., & Willoughby, T. (2011). Perceived parental monitoring, adolescent disclosure, and adolescent depressive symptomology: A longitudinal examination. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 40(7), 902e915. Hoeve, M., Dubas, J. S., Eichelsheim, V. I., van der Laan, P. H., Smeenk, W., & Gerris, J. R. M. (2009). The relationship between parenting and delinquency: A meta-analysis. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 37, 749e775. Kerr, M., & Stattin, H. (2000). What parents know, how they know it, and several forms of adolescent adjustment: Further support for a reinterpretation of monitoring. Developmental Psychology, 36(3), 366e380. Liu, J. (2004). Childhood externalizing behavior: Theory and implications. Journal of Child and Adolescent Psychiatric Nursing, 17(3), 93e103. Luthar, S. S., Cicchetti, D., & Becker, B. (2000). The construct of resilience: A critical evaluation and guidelines for future work. Child Development, 71, 543e562. Madigan, S., Atkinson, L., Laurin, K., & Benoit, D. (2013). Attachment and internalizing behavior in early childhood: A meta-analysis. Developmental Psychology, 49(4), 672e689. Mills, R. L., & Rubin, K. H. (1998). Are behavioural and psychological control both differentially associated with childhood aggression and social withdrawal? Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 30(2), 132e136. Murray, K. W., Dwyer, K. M., Rubin, K. H., Knighton-Wisor, S., & Booth-LaForce, C. (2014). Parent-child relationships, parental psychological control, and aggression: Maternal and paternal relationships. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 43(8), 1361e1373. Pettit, G. S., Laird, R. D., Dodge, K. A., Bates, J. E., & Criss, M. M. (2001). Antecedents and behaviour-problem outcomes of parental monitoring and psychological control in early adolescence. Child Development, 72(2), 583e598. Pleck, J. H., & Mascaidrelli, B. P. (2004). Parental involvement: Levels, sources and consequences. In M. E. Lamb (Ed.), The role of the father in child development. New Jersey: John Wiley and Sons. Plunkett, S. W., Henry, C. S., Robinson, L. C., Behnke, A., & Falcon, P. C., III (2007). Adolescent perceptions of parental behaviors, adolescent self-esteem, and adolescent depressed mood. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 16, 760e772. Rogers, K. N., Buchanan, C. M., & Winchell, M. E. (2003). Psychological control during early adolescence: Links to adjustment in differing parent/adolescent dyads. Journal of Early Adolescence, 23(4), 349e383. Schacht, P. M., Cummings, E. M., & Davies, P. T. (2009). Fathering in family context and child adjustment: A longitudinal analysis. Journal of Family Psychology, 23(6), 790e797.
M. Symeou, S. Georgiou / Journal of Adolescence 60 (2017) 104e113
113
Schludermann, E. H., & Schludermann, S. M. (1988). Children's report on parent behavior for older children and adolescents. Winnipeg, Canada: University of Manitoba, Department of Psychology. Soucy, N., & Larose, S. (2000). Attachment and control in family and mentoring contexts as determinants of adolescent adjustment to college. Journal of Family Psychology, 14(1), 125e143. Sourander, A., Helstel€ a, L., & Helenius, H. (1999). Parent-adolescent agreement on emotional and behavioral problems. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 34(12), 657e663. Steinberg, L. (1990). Interdependence in the family: Autonomy, conflict, and harmony in the parenteadolescent relationship. In S. S. Feldman, & G. R. Elliott (Eds.), At the threshold: The developing adolescent (pp. 255e276). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Tanner, J., Davies, S., & O'Grady, B. (1999). Whatever happened to yesterday's rebels? Longitudinal effects of teenage delinquency on education and occupational outcomes. Social Problems, 46(2), 250e274. Wei, C., & Kendall, P. C. (2014). Child perceived parenting behavior: Childhood anxiety and related symptoms. Child & Family Behavior Therapy, 36, 1e18. Williams, S. K., & Kelly, F. D. (2005). Relationships among involvement, attachment, and behavioral problems in adolescence: Examining father's influence. Journal of Early Adolescence, 25, 168e196.
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Journal of Adolescence journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jado
Externalizing and internalizing behaviours in adolescence, and the importance of parental behavioural and psychological control practices Maria Symeou*, Stelios Georgiou University of Cyprus, Department of Psychology, Nicosia, Cyprus
a r t i c l e i n f o
a b s t r a c t
Article history: Received 12 July 2016 Received in revised form 24 May 2017 Accepted 12 July 2017
The aims of the present study were to explore the impact of parental characteristics (behavioural control and psychological control) on adolescents' expression of externalizing and internalizing behaviours. To address the aim of the study, participants completed quantitative measures; the study included 538 adolescents and their mothers and fathers. Overall, 513 mothers and 464 fathers participated in the study. Adolescents completed the Children's Report on Parent Behaviour Inventory (CRPBI), while parents completed the Child Behaviour Checklist e Parent Report (Short Form; CBCL). Results of the study showed that only maternal and paternal psychological control predicted externalizing and internalizing behaviours. The conclusions have practical applications, as they can provide novel approaches in parent training programmes. Furthermore, results are discussed in relation to the connection with earlier studies and the theoretical contribution. © 2017 The Foundation for Professionals in Services for Adolescents. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Externalizing behaviours Internalizing behaviours Behavioural control Psychological control Adolescence Parental practices
1. Introduction An important differentiation in child psychology is the separation between ‘externalizing’ and ‘internalizing’ disorders (Achenbach, 1978). Externalizing behaviours (EBs) refer to behaviour problems that are evident in children's outward behaviour, such as rule-breaking actions, aggression and delinquency. Because of the immediate and long-term negative effects associated with those behaviours, they are considered as highly problematic for society; longitudinal research shows that an adolescent's EBs are a risk factor for numerous negative outcomes, such as juvenile delinquency, future crime and violence (cited in Liu, 2004) and decreased educational and occupational attainment in adulthood (Tanner, Davis, & O'Grady, 1999). Alternatively, internalizing behaviours (IBs) refer to behaviour problems that are inner-directed and overcontrolled (Madigan, Atkinson, Laurin, & Benoit, 2013). In other words, IBs affect the individual's psychological world (Liu, 2004). People who experience IBs present symptoms related to social isolation, withdrawal, anxiety and depression (Madigan et al., 2013; Williams & Kelly, 2005). IBs are linked to less positive adjustment in adulthood (cited in Hamza & Willoughby, 2011), lower levels of self-esteem and self-efficacy (Kerr & Stattin, 2000), poor academic achievement, suicidal behaviours or ideation during adolescence and attempted suicide and completed suicide in adulthood (cited in Plunkett, Henry, Robinson, Behnke, &
* Corresponding author. Department of Psychology, University of Cyprus, P.O. Box 20537, CY 1678, Nicosia, Cyprus. E-mail address: [email protected] (M. Symeou). http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2017.07.007 0140-1971/© 2017 The Foundation for Professionals in Services for Adolescents. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
M. Symeou, S. Georgiou / Journal of Adolescence 60 (2017) 104e113
105
Falcon , 2007). Accordingly, given the short-term and long-term consequences of EB/IB, researchers have recognized the significance of understanding the nature of these behaviours. Within research on the parameters of EB/IB, investigation of interpersonal factors, such as parental factors, is often included,. For instance, negative parenting practices are considered to be important factors affecting the development of EB/ IB. Additionally, both parents are now considered as important figures in the exhibition of EB/IB, even though the contribution of the father has been largely underestimated. Socialization researchers have long showed considerable interest in the way in which parents supervise and regulate the behaviour of their children. Within the literature, the terms parental ‘behavioural control’ and parental ‘psychological control’ have been used to describe such parenting behaviours and styles (Pettit, Laird, Dodge, Bates, & Criss, 2001). Behavioural control (BC) refers to practices that aim to regulate children's behaviours to be consistent with established family or social norms (Barber, 1996) and involves clear and consistent rules, supervision and management of behaviour. Conversely, psychological control (PC) refers to parental control of the child's or adolescent's psychological world, wherein parents are, usually, non-responsive to the youngster's psychological and emotional needs. Essentially, it refers to control attempts (e.g., love withdrawal, devaluation, guilt induction) that ‘constrain, invalidate, and manipulate a child's psychological and emotional experience and expression’ (Barber, 1996) by keeping the child emotionally dependent on the parent (Mills & Rubin, 1998). Hence, the two forms of control elucidate important distinctions in their definitions. PC has to do with ‘the relative degree of emotional autonomy that the parent allows’, whereas BC has to do with ‘the level of monitoring and limit setting that the parent uses’ (Gray & Steinberg, 1999). At the heart of the distinction between the two terms is the notion that they affect individuals in different ways. As far as BC is concerned with behavioural supervision, regulation and management, it is thought to serve a positive socializing function. In contrast, PC refers to control attempts that interfere with an adolescent's need for independence, and it is thought to impede the development of autonomy and self-direction (Barber, 1996; Steinberg, 1990). Indeed, studies have found differential associations of parenting with adolescent EB and IB (e.g., Galambos, Barker, & Almeida, 2003; Gray & Steinberg, 1999; Hoeve et al., 2009; Pettit et al., 2001). Behavioural undercontrol has been directly linked with EB, such as substance use, antisocial behaviour, delinquency and sexual precocity (Barber, 1996; Barber, Olsen, & Shagle, 1994; Galambos et al., 2003; Mills & Rubin, 1998; Pettit et al., 2001). One explanation for this link may be that uncontrolled environments fail to cultivate self-regulation in children, leaving them more prone to contravene social norms (Barber, 1996). In contrast, PC has been associated to IB, such as depression and a lack of self-confidence (Pettit et al., 2001). For example, Plunkett et al. (2007) found a positive association between parental PC and depressed mood in adolescent boys. One explanation for this association might be that as adolescents experience PC, they may consider their parents as being non-responsive to their emotional and psychological needs, and this encumbers the adolescents' abilities to trust their own uniqueness and ideas (Barber, 1996). Additionally, Mills and Rubin (1998) found links between BC and internalizing symptomatology; from their data, mothers of socially withdrawn children appeared to be behaviourally overcontrolling. Furthermore, there is also evidence to suggest that PC may be related with externalizing symptomatology (Hoeve et al., 2009; Mills & Rubin, 1998; Rogers, Buchanan, & Winchell, 2003). In one study, Cui, Morris, Criss, Houltberg, and Silk (2014) found an indirect predictive association between PC and adolescent aggressiveness. As Mills and Rubin (1998) suggest, PC tactics may lead to aggression by arousing anger. Likewise, Rogers et al. (2003) found that parent-reported EB and IB were predicted by perceived parental PC. Nonetheless, these findings should be interpreted with caution. On the one hand, research demonstrates discrepancies between parental reports €, & Helenius, 1999). As Rogers et al. (2003) argue though, given that, longitudinally, and youth self-reports (Sourander, Helstela links between IB and PC emerged primarily with adolescent reports, this might designate that links between IB and PC is, in fact, in the mind of the adolescent due to a negative cognitive bias. Hence, having parents report on their children's EB and IB and adolescents report their perceptions of their parents' control tactics controls for any response bias. Furthermore, this minimizes the chances that any findings would be due to common source variance. Nevertheless, as BC and PC have only recently been examined as possible determinants of both EB and IB, this makes it difficult to draw any meaningful conclusions. Thus, the present study aims to provide an insight into the ways in which BC and PC are associated with both EB/IB. However, one important issue that arises with parenting research is the systematic neglect and exclusion of fathers from studies of childrens' and adolescents' development. Even though empirical interest in the father-child relationship is noticeably increasing, research often ignores or disregards the importance of fathers, and so fathers are still undervalued in studies of child development (Schacht, Cummings, & Davies, 2009). For example, a meta-analysis concluded that less than 20% of the studies focused on the father figure, even though specific paternal parenting behaviours had a larger effect than maternal parenting behaviours (Hoeve et al., 2009). Likewise, empirical evidence indicates that mothers and fathers may differ in their use of control tactics. This may be for a multitude of reasons. For instance, Barber (1996) concluded that mothers exert higher levels of PC than fathers do; this may be because the mother is usually the primary caretaker with whom adolescents have the most interaction (Rogers et al., 2003). Hence, as the mother is usually more involved in the adolescents' general day-to-day activities (Pleck & Mascaidrelli, 2004), she may be more likely to want to ‘make certain’ that her offspring is well aware of his or her parents' contribution in his or her upbringing. Overall, one should consider such issues as the quantity and quality of the time that fathers and mothers spend with their children and who is considered to be the more dominant parent. Overall though, because fathers have become increasingly more involved in the lives of their children, the inclusion of fathers in parenting research is imperative; doing so, will provide more concrete conclusions on the association between parent practices and adolescent behavioural difficulties (Pleck & Mascaidrelli, 2004). Furthermore, evidence suggests that a
106
M. Symeou, S. Georgiou / Journal of Adolescence 60 (2017) 104e113
positive relationship with the father may shield the child from adversities, even if the mother-child relationship is strained (e.g., Murray, Dwyer, Rubin, Knighton-Wisor, & Booth-LaForce, 2014). More specifically, Murray et al. (2014) found evidence that, for boys, even if mothers exert PC, having a high-quality relationship with their father decreased the risk for EB. This further adds to the importance of examining both parents as significant for the adolescent's behavioural and psychosocial adjustment. Nonetheless, fathers' and mothers' understanding of their adolescent children's behaviour might differ. This might be both for quantitative and qualitative reasons. For instance, as mothers are, comparatively, known to spend quantitatively more time with their offspring, for this reason, they might also be more aware of certain behavioural problems that their adolescent children may be experiencing. To this end, it is essential to consider their viewpoints separately. In consideration of all these points, the present study hypothesizes that (a) BC will significantly negatively predict EB, and (b) PC will significantly positively predict IB. Additionally, the possible predictive relationship of BC to IB and PC to EB will also be examined. Finally, it is anticipated that both mothers and fathers will play a significant role in their adolescents' behavioural and psychosocial well-being.
2. Methods 2.1. Participants For the data collection, 8 secondary schools in Cyprus were randomly chosen: 5 public schools in urban areas, 1 public school in a rural area, 1 private school and 1 technical school. The sample of the study consisted of 538 adolescent students (M ¼ 16.01 years, SD ¼ 0.88 years) who attended the fourth, fifth and sixth grades of secondary school and their mothers and fathers. Approximately 41.1% (N ¼ 221; M ¼ 15.95 years, SD ¼ 0.87 years) of the sample consisted of male adolescent students, and 58.9% (N ¼ 317; M ¼ 16,06 years, SD ¼ 0.88 years) of the sample consisted of female adolescent students (see Table 1). Similar to the official data from the Statistical Service of the Cyprus Government, the majority of adolescent participants were students attending public secondary schools in urban areas, followed by students who attend secondary private schools, secondary technical schools and public secondary schools in rural areas (see Table 2). When the data of the study and the official data from the Statistical Service of the Cyprus Government are compared by gender, they seem to be, for the most part, congruent (CYSTAT for male students: 60.1%, 15.7%, 20.9% and 3.3%, respectively; CYSTAT for female students: 75.1%, 16.9%, 4.2% and 3.9%, respectively). Thus, the present data seems to be representative of the number of students who attend the fourth, fifth and sixth grades of secondary education in Cyprus. Additionally, 977 parents responded positively and completed the questionnaires. More specifically, 86.2% of the fathers and 95.4% of the mothers of the 538 adolescent students returned the questionnaires completed; 464 fathers (M ¼ 47.63 years, SD ¼ 5.10 years) and 513 mothers (M ¼ 44.25 years, SD ¼ 4.73 years). To be included in the analyses, at least one parent was required to have completed the questionnaires. Ergo, for 439 (81.6%) of the adolescent participants, both parents returned their questionnaires completed; for 25 (4.6%) of the adolescents, only their fathers completed their questionnaires and for 74 (13.8%) of the adolescents only their mothers completed the questionnaires.
2.2. Measures
2.2.1. Adolescent data collection 2.2.1.1. Demographic data. Adolescent students were required to give some data in relation to their gender, age and place of residence. 2.2.1.2. Parental control. Adolescents' perceptions of parents' BC and PC were assessed with the Children's Report on Parent Behaviour Inventory (CRPBI; Schludermann & Schludermann, 1988). For the study, only the psychological control/autonomy subscale and firm control/lax control subscale were utilized. The 20 items derived from the two subscales describe the mother and the father separatelydwith pronoun adjustments for gender.
Table 1 Number of adolescent students who participated in the study, according to their gender and grade (percentages in brackets). Grade
Gender
Male Female Total
4th Grade
5th Grade
6th Grade
Total
83 (37.6%) 106 (33.4%) 189 (35.1%)
77 (34.8%) 100 (31.6%) 177 (32.9%)
61 (27.6%) 111 (35%) 172 (32%)
221 (41.1%) 317 (58.9%) 538 (100%)
M. Symeou, S. Georgiou / Journal of Adolescence 60 (2017) 104e113
107
Table 2 Number of adolescent students who participated in the study, according to the type of school they attend (percentages in brackets). Type of school
Gender
Male Female Total
Public school e urban area
Private school
Technical school
Public school e rural area
Total
156 (70.6%) 245 (77.3%) 401 (74.5%)
36 (16.3%) 50 (15.7%) 86 (16%)
19 (8.6%) 11 (3.5%) 30 (5.6%)
10 (4.5%) 11 (3.5%) 21 (3.9%)
221 (41.1%) 317 (58.9%) 538 (100%)
BC was measured using 10 items. Examples of items included in this subscale are: ‘My mother/father believes in having a lot of rules and sticking to them’, and ‘My mother/father gives me as much freedom as I want’ (recoded item). PC tactics were also measured via 10 items; examples of items included are: ‘My mother/father tells me of all the things she/he had done for me’, and ‘My mother/father is less friendly with me if I do not see things her/his way’. Questions were rated on a 5-point Likert-type scale, ranging from ‘never’ (1) to ‘always’ (5) with high scores on each subscale being indicative of high control tactics. The psychometric properties of the CRPBI (Schludermann & Schludermann, 1988) have been supportive (Alderfer et al., 2008), and the subscales demonstrated satisfactory internal consistency values. In a study by Soucy and Larose (2000), the internal consistency values (Cronbach alpha coefficients) of the mother-adolescent and father-adolescent scores for the BC and PC subscales were 0.81, 0.88, 0.81 and 0.85, respectively.
2.2.2. Parental data collection 2.2.2.1. Demographic data. Parents were required to give some data in relation to their gender, age, place of residence and information about their marital status and level of education. 2.2.2.2. Externalizing and internalizing behaviours e short form. To measure EB/IB in adolescence, the school-age version (children ages 4e18) of the Child Behaviour Checklist e Parent Report (Short Form) (CBCL; Achenbach, 1991) was used. The measure is a standardized form consisting of 40 statements that describe the adolescent during the previous six (6) months. Parents or caregivers report on their children's behavioural and emotional problems using a 3-point Likert-type response format (0 ¼ not true, 1 ¼ somewhat or sometimes true, 2 ¼ very true or often true). The 40-item CBCL is made up of five syndrome scales that group into two higher-order factorsdexternalizing and internalizing. The EB domain consists of: ❖ Delinquent behaviour e assessed by nine items e includes lying, cheating, swearing, truancy, stealing, setting fires and vandalism. ❖ Aggressive behaviour e assessed by 10 items e includes bragging, arguing, screaming, showing off, attention-seeking, teasing, being demanding, displaying threatening behaviour and displaying a temper. Alternatively, the IB domain consists of: ❖ Withdrawal symptoms e addressed by 6 items, questions concerning social withdrawal, shyness, staring, sulking and sadness. ❖ Somatic complaints e addressed by 3 items (with one item being further subdivided into 8 subquestions) includes tiredness, nausea, aching, vomiting, headaches, dizziness and complaints about skin, stomach or eye problems; and ❖ Anxious/depressed syndromes e addressed by 12 items, including crying, fear, guilt, loneliness, nervousness, worthlessness and suspiciousness. The CBCL has been widely used (e.g., Buehler, 2006; Georgiou & Fanti, 2014; Rogers et al., 2003) with extensive literature supporting its psychometric integrity (Achenbach, 1991). Validity and reliability for the scale scores have been documented (Achenbach & Rescorla, 2001; Buehler, 2006). In Georgiou and Fanti's (2014) study, the Cronbach's alphas for EB ranged from 0.87 to 0.94 and for IB from 0.83 to 0.92. 2.3. Procedure Eight schools were randomly chosen and asked to participate in the study. Upon agreeing to participate, students were briefly informed of the purposes of the study and were given an envelope containing the questionnaires to be taken home and completed by their parents. One week following the first visitation to the students, student data collection was carried out. Those adolescents whose parents completed their questionnaires were given their own questionnaires to complete. Once all the students completed their questionnaires, they were thanked for their participation and fully debriefed.
108
M. Symeou, S. Georgiou / Journal of Adolescence 60 (2017) 104e113
3. Results 3.1. Reliability analyses The two subscales of the CRPBI demonstrated satisfactory internal consistency values. More specifically, the internal consistency values of the mother-adolescent and father-adolescent scores for the BC and PC subscales were 0.79, 0.81, 0.85 and 0.86, respectively. The a coefficient for the total CRPBI scale was also satisfactory both for mother-adolescent (a ¼ 0.85) and father-adolescent (a ¼ 0.88) reports. With regard to the CBCL, Cronbach's alpha was 0.81 for the mothers' reports of EB and 0.84 for IB; similarly, Cronbach's alpha was 0.81 for the fathers' reports of EB and 0.82 for IB. The a coefficient for the total CBCL scale was also satisfactory both for the mothers' (a ¼ 0.88) and the fathers' reports (a ¼ 0.87). 3.2. Parental level of education Both parents reported on their level of education. Regarding the fathers, 159 graduated from secondary school, 195 completed tertiary education, 91 obtained a master's degree, 7 were holders of a Ph.D., and 3 were not high school graduates. Nine fathers did not provide any information regarding their educational status. Similarly, 138 mothers graduated from secondary school, 259 completed tertiary education, 92 obtained a master's degree, 6 were holders of a Ph.D., and 9 were not high school graduates. Nine mothers did not provide any information regarding their educational status. 3.3. Comparisons between parental-control practices based on adolescents' age A series of multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) were performed to investigate differences in experiences of maternal and paternal BC and PC practices based on the adolescents' age. First, experiences of maternal BC and PC practices for adolescents' age were compared. Results indicated that there was a statistically significant difference between adolescents' age and parental control, F (8, 1054) ¼ 2.45, p ¼ 0.013; Wilks' Lambda ¼ 0.96; partial eta squared ¼ 0.02. When the results for maternal BC and PC were considered separately, the only difference to reach statistical significance, using Bonferroni adjusted alpha levels of 0.025 per test (0.05/2), was BC, F (4, 528) ¼ 3.70, p ¼ 0.006; partial eta squared ¼ 0.03. An inspection of the mean scores indicated that as adolescents' age increased, maternal BC decreased (14 years old: M ¼ 29.33, SD ¼ 1.53; 15 years old: M ¼ 27.33, SD ¼ 6.28; 16 years old: M ¼ 26.87, SD ¼ 6.65; 17 years old: M ¼ 25.58, SD ¼ 6.33; 18 years old: M ¼ 22.00, SD ¼ 6.48). Similarly, a MANOVA was used to compare experiences of paternal BC and PC practices for adolescents' age. There was no statistically significant difference between adolescents' age on experiences of paternal BC and PC, F (8, 1034) ¼ 1.03, p ¼ 0.413; Wilks' Lambda ¼ 0.984; partial eta squared ¼ 0.008. 3.4. Comparisons between maternal and paternal parental control Paired-sample t-tests, using Bonferroni adjusted alpha levels of 0.025 per test (0.05/2), were conducted to compare maternal and paternal parental control. On average, adolescent participants reported that fathers exhibited higher BC (M ¼ 27.52, SD ¼ 7.27) than mothers (M ¼ 26.53, SD ¼ 6.51). This difference was significant (t (518) ¼ 3.53, p < 0.0001) and represented a largeesized effect, r ¼ 0.15. On the contrary, mothers were reported to exhibit higher PC (M ¼ 21.26, SD ¼ 7.40) than fathers (M ¼ 19.53, SD ¼ 7.37). This difference was significant (t (517) ¼ 5.26, p < 0.0001) and represented a largeesized effect, r ¼ 0.22. 3.5. Associations between parent control and externalizing and internalizing behaviours Bivariate correlations between the relevant scales were computed to identify possible associations among parental control tactics and adolescents' exhibition of EB and IB. Results indicated that specific patterns of control tactics were significantly related with EB and IB (see Tables 3 and 4, respectively).
Table 3 Correlation coefficients between mother parental control and externalizing and internalizing behaviours.
Mother behavioural control Mother psychological control M-R externalizing behaviours M-R internalizing behaviours
Mother psychological control
M-R externalizing behaviours
M-R internalizing behaviours
0.37**
0.09* 0.34**
0.00 0.15** 0.46**
Note: *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01; M-R ¼ Mother-Reported.
M. Symeou, S. Georgiou / Journal of Adolescence 60 (2017) 104e113
109
Table 4 Correlation coefficients between father parental control and externalizing and internalizing behaviours.
Father behavioural control Father psychological control F-R externalizing behaviours F-R internalizing behaviours
Father psychological control
F-R externalizing behaviours
F-R internalizing behaviours
0.52**
0.13** 0.29**
0.08 0.21** 0.49**
Note: *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01; F-R ¼ Father-Reported.
3.6. Parental control and externalizing and internalizing behaviours e predictive relationships The hypothesis of the study states that BC will significantly negatively predict EB (and that predictive links to IB will be examined), whereas PC will significantly positively predict IB (and that predictive links to EB will be examined). Hierarchical multiple regression analyses (blockwise entry) were computed to examine the relative contribution of maternal and paternal parental control to adolescent's EB/IB. In hierarchical (blockwise entry) regression, known predictors from past research are entered into the model first. Consequently, in examining EB, BC was entered into the model first, whereas, for IB, PC was entered into the model first. 3.6.1. Externalizing behaviours For mother-reported EB, demographic information was entered in Block 1, explaining of 1.7% the variance of EB (r2 ¼ 0.017, adjusted r2 ¼ 0.000). BC was entered in Block 2, explaining 3% of the variance of EB (r2 ¼ 0.030, adjusted r2 ¼ 0.008). After entry of PC in Block 3, the total variance explained by the model as a whole was 11.6% (r2 ¼ 0.116, adjusted r2 ¼ 0.092), F (11, 412) ¼ 4.92, p < 0.0005. In the final model, only mother PC (b ¼ 0.28, p < 0.0005) was statistically significant. ВC or father PC did not significantly predict EB. For father-reported EB, demographic information was entered in Block 1, explaining the 2% the variance of EB (r2 ¼ 0.020, adjusted r2 ¼ 0.004). ВC was entered in Block 2, explaining 3.7% of the variance of EB (r2 ¼ 0.037, adjusted r2 ¼ 0.016). After entry of PC in Block 3, the total variance explained by the model as a whole was 13% (r2 ¼ 0.130, adjusted r2 ¼ 0.107), F (11, 413) ¼ 5.60, p < 0.0005. In the final model, only PC (father: b ¼ 0.17, p < 0.05; mother: b ¼ 0.23, p < 0.0005) was statistically significant in predicting EB. BC did not reach statistical significance (see Tables 5 and 6, respectively). 3.6.2. Internalizing behaviours For mother-reported IB, demographic information was entered in Block 1, explaining 5.2% of the variance of IB (r2 ¼ 0.052, adjusted r2 ¼ 0.036). PC was entered in Block 2, explaining 5.8% of the variance of IB (r2 ¼ 0.058, adjusted r2 ¼ 0.062). After entry of BC in Block 3, the total variance explained by the model as a whole was 8.8% (r2 ¼ 0.088, adjusted r2 ¼ 0.064), F (11, 414) ¼ 3.63, p < 0.0005. In the final model, only mother PC (b ¼ 0.14, p < 0.05) was statistically significant in predicting IB. BC or father PC did not reach statistical significance. For father-reported IB, demographic data was entered in Block 1, explaining 5.9% of the variance of IB (r2 ¼ 0.059, adjusted r2 ¼ 0.043). PC was entered in Block 2, explaining 10.9% of the variance of IB (r2 ¼ 0.109, Adjusted r2 ¼ 0.089). After entry of BC in Block 3, the total variance explained by the model as a whole was 10.9% (r2 ¼ 0.109, adjusted r2 ¼ 0.085), F (11, 411) ¼ 4.56, p < 0.0005. In the final model, only one predictordfather PC (b ¼ 0.19, p < 0.05) dwas statistically significant. BC or mother PC did not significantly predict father-reported IB (see Tables 7 and 8, respectively). Overall, the results demonstrate that PC is an important factor in predicting an adolescent's expression of both EB/IB. In other words, the more PC parents employ, the more EB or IB the adolescents exhibit. BC was not found to predict either EB nor IB. Table 5 Hierarchical regression analyses predicting adolescent's mother-reported externalizing behaviours from parental control. Dependent
Predictors
Mother-reported externalizing behaviours
Block 1 Age Gender Grade Mother's Marital Status Mother's Educational Level Father's Marital Status Father's Educational Level Block 2 Mother Behavioural Control Father Behavioural Control Block 3 Mother Psychological Control Father Psychological Control
Note: *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01.
b
DR2 0.017
0.06 0.00 0.02 0.04 0.12 0.02 0.02 0.030 0.06 0.03 0.115 0.28** 0.08
110
M. Symeou, S. Georgiou / Journal of Adolescence 60 (2017) 104e113
Table 6 Hierarchical regression analyses predicting adolescent's father-reported externalizing behaviours from parental control. Dependent
Predictors
Father-reported externalizing behaviours
Block 1 Age Gender Grade Mother's Marital Status Mother's Educational Level Father's Marital Status Father's Educational Level Block 2 Mother Behavioural Control Father Behavioural Control Block 3 Mother Psychological Control Father Psychological Control
b
D R2 0.020
0.09 0.02 0.11 0.03 0.15 0.01 0.02 0.037 0.07 0.03 0.130 0.23** 0.17*
Note: *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01.
4. Discussion The present study aimed to provide an understanding of how certain hypothesized parental factorsdBC and PCdmay influence the development of EB/IB. The analyses yielded mixed findings. The hypothesis of the study was partially supported. Consistent with the formulated hypothesis, it was found that psychological control was associated with adolescents' exhibition of IB. This finding is in agreement with previous studies (e.g., Hoeve et al., 2009; Plunkett et al., 2007; Rogers et al., 2003) that concluded that PC is associated with internalizing symptomatology (Pettit et al., 2001; Plunkett et al., 2007; Wei & Kendall, 2014). Thus, it was not unusual to find that PC tactics were associated with EB/IB in the present study as well. Adolescents experiencing parental PC may perceive their parents as undermining their need for autonomy and, thus, feel unable to trust their own abilities and uniqueness (Barber, 1996). Even though parental use of PC accounted for 8.2%e10.9% of the variance in IB, these figures are similar to previous research (e.g., Finkenauer, Engels, & Baumeister, 2005; Galambos et al., 2003). The small portions of variance suggest that it might be fruitful to consider a broader array of parenting predictors, such as attachment, child disclosure and parent-child conflict. One other important finding was the positive association between parental PC and EB. Even though externalizing symptomatology traditionally has more prominent empirical associations to BC, some researchers also support the linkage between PC and EB (e.g., Cui et al., 2014; Hoeve et al., 2009; Rogers et al., 2003), and the present study provides further support of this proposition. PC accounted for 11.5%e13% of the variance in EB. Again, despite the small portions of variance, these figures are similar to previous research using pre-adolescent and young adolescent samples (e.g., Finkenauer et al., 2005; Hoeve et al., 2009). How do PC tactics relate to the exhibition of EB? PC tactics may lead to aggressive behaviours by arousing anger (Mills & Rubin, 1998). In regards to BC, it is argued that under-controlled environments are predictive of more EB than their counterparts whose parents practice BC tactics. Thus, the finding of the present study was unexpected, as it contradicts previous research, wherein BC has been linked with EB (Barber et al., 1994; Galambos et al., 2003; Pettit et al., 2001), and with IB (Mills & Rubin, 1998; Wei & Kendall, 2014). All in all, the findings suggest that PC is important in determining youths' exhibition of EB/IB. It seems that adolescence is a fundamental period in developing self-sufficiency and independence, and so, any tactics that go against those needs corrode self-perception and negatively influence inward and outward behaviours. Even though mothers are traditionally considered as the primary caregivers of their children (Bowlby, 1973), an important finding of this study was that both parents were significant in determining the degree to which their adolescent children would display EB and/or IB. This finding is important, as it further supports the inclusion of fathers both in the applied and in the research setting. 4.1. Contribution of the study A contribution of the study is the fact that specific findings challenge previously established conclusions. For example, BC was traditionally associated with EB, whereas PC was associated with IB. However, our results indicated that, for mid-to-late adolescents, BC is not related to EB, while PC was related to both EB/IB. Thus, conclusions of the present study have practical applications because they can provide novel approaches in parent training programmes. For example, prevention and intervention methods can benefit from the findings that PC is strongly related to EB/IB and that both parents are important for the well-being of their child. Hence, parenting-skills training programmes should encourage both parents to be positively involved in their child's life. One other important contribution of the present research is the inclusion of fathers in the study. Due to the fact that inclusion of fathers in research concerning children's and adolescent's development within multiple family contexts is often
M. Symeou, S. Georgiou / Journal of Adolescence 60 (2017) 104e113
111
Table 7 Hierarchical regression analyses predicting adolescent's mother-reported internalizing behaviours from parental control. Dependent
Predictors
Mother-reported internalizing behaviours
Block 1 Age Gender Grade Mother's Marital Status Mother's Educational Level Father's Marital Status Father's Educational Level Block 2 Mother Psychological Control Father Psychological Control Block 3 Mother Behavioural Control Father Behavioural Control
b
DR2 0.052
0.10 0.22 0.03 0.04 0.08 0.02 0.01 0.082 0.14* 0.08 0.088 0.11 0.05
Note: *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01.
Table 8 Hierarchical regression analyses predicting adolescent's father-reported internalizing behaviours from parental control. Dependent
Predictors
Father-reported internalizing behaviours
Block 1 Age Gender Grade Mother's Marital Status Mother's Educational Level Father's Marital Status Father's Educational Level Block 2 Mother Psychological Control Father Psychological Control Block 3 Mother Behavioural Control Father Behavioural Control
b
DR2 0.059
0.13 0.20 0.12 0.25 0.10 0.13 0.04 0.109 0.07 0.19* 0.109 0.01 0.01
Note: *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01.
neglected, meaningful conclusions regarding parental importance as a whole are difficult to draw. Nonetheless, both mothers and fathers were found to be important in determining the degree to which EB/IB would be experienced. Further strengths of the study include the exploration of age differences and comparisons between maternal and paternal parental control. An important finding is that experiences of maternal BC differ for adolescents of different ages; more specifically, mothers exert more BC tactics when their children are in their mid-adolescent period, but reduce their limitsetting for adolescents who are close to reaching adulthood. This finding highlights the importance of considering one's age in concluding about certain associations. Finally, quantitative data were gathered from three main informantsdthe adolescents, and their fathers and mothers. Parents reported on their children's behavioural and emotional problems, whereas adolescents reported their perceptions of their parents' BC and PC tactics. This way, response bias (e.g., social desirability; parents providing misinformation in regards to their control tactics in a way that will be considered more favorable by researchers) was controlled. Furthermore, using multi-informants minimizes the chances that any statistical findings would be due to common source variance. In addition, using multiple informants regarding the same topic (such as, for example, both parents providing data on their children's EB/ IB) increases the reliability and credibility of that particular measurement. 4.2. Limitations of the present study and recommendations for further research Several limitations of the present study should be noted. First of all, the findings of the present study cannot be generalized to children of all ages. Accordingly, other life periods could provide a different picture of the relationship between parental control and EB/IB. Additionally, one other limitation of the present study is the reliance on adolescents as the only reporter of their parents' control tactics. The fact is that by having solely one informant, that informant may not respond objectively. Consequently, inaccurate responding may produce misleading results or ambiguous important relationships between variables. Likewise, having parents report on the adolescents' experiences of EB/IB may also be a limitation of the study. Even though the CBCL is considered one of the most well-known measures of identifying problem behaviours, the reliance on solely parent reports for
112
M. Symeou, S. Georgiou / Journal of Adolescence 60 (2017) 104e113
identifying behavioural difficulties in adolescents may be erroneous. Research demonstrates the existence of discrepancies between parent reports and youth self-reports, with the youth reporting greater internalizing symptoms (Sourander et al., 1999). Furthermore, due to the unidimensional, cross-sectional nature of the data, the direction of the theorized effects of parental control on EB/IB cannot be confirmed. It is possible that the direction is actually reverse; for example, considering PC, parents who perceive their children as exhibiting EB or IB may increase their attempts to shape the personality of their child through PC tactics. Taking these drawbacks into consideration, future research should aim to address these limitations. First and foremost, it is essential to include multiple informants regarding each variable of interest. Also, future research should consider the limitations of cross-sectional designs. Instead, using longitudinal data provides additional information concerning changes in the associations over time. Furthermore, application of transactional models would be helpful in answering questions about reciprocal effects between adolescents and their parents. In addition to the above, future research should also focus on examining the moderation role of an adolescent's age in the relationship between parental control and the exhibition of EB and IB. Lastly, research has consistently indicated that children and adolescents whose parents employ negative rearing practices are more prone to expressing EB/IB. Nevertheless, some individuals exposed to these adverse parenting practices are able to develop with few, if any, difficulties. What is it about some children that allow them to function well despite their adversity? Researchers have considered resilience as one factor that helps children overcome their negative experiences with their parents; a dynamic process wherein an individual displays positive adaptation despite experiences of significant adversity or trauma (Luthar, Cichetti, & Becker, 2000). Future research should also focus on exploring the moderating effect of protective factors, such as resilience, in the relationship between parental control and adolescents' EB/IB. Establishing such moderation effects has potential practical implications for social-skills prevention and intervention programmes designed to boost social competence.
References Achenbach, T. M. (1978). The child behavior profile: I. Boys aged 6-11. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 46, 478e488. Achenbach, T. M. (1991). Manual for the child behavior Checklist/4-18 and 1991 profile. Burlington, VT: University of Vermont, Department of Psychiatry. Achenbach, T. M., & Rescorla, L. A. (2001). Manual for the ASEBA school-age forms & profiles. Burlington, VT: University of Vermont, Research Center for Children, Youth, & Families. Alderfer, M. A., Fiese, B. H., Gold, J. I., Cutuli, J. J., Holmbeck, G. N., Goldbeck, L., et al. (2008). Evidence-based assessment in pediatric psychology: Family measures. Journal of Pediatric Psychology, 33(9), 1046e1061. Barber, B. K. (1996). Parental psychological control: Revisiting a neglected construct. Child Development, 67, 3296e3319. Barber, B. K., Olsen, J. E., & Shagle, S. C. (1994). Associations between parental psychological and behavioral control and youth internalized and externalized behaviors. Child Development, 65, 1120e1136. Bowlby, J. (1973). Attachment and loss, vol. 2: Separation. New York: Basic Books. Buehler, C. (2006). Parents and peers in relation to early adolescent problem behavior. Journal of Marriage and Family, 68, 109e124. Cui, L., Morris, A. S., Criss, M. M., Houltberg, B. J., & Silk, J. S. (2014). Parental psychological control and adolescent adjustment: The role of adolescent emotion regulation. Parenting: Science and Practice, 14(1), 47e67. Finkenauer, C., Engels, R. C. M. E., & Baumeister, R. F. (2005). Parenting behavior and adolescent behavioural and emotional problems: The role of selfcontrol. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 29(1), 58e69. Galambos, N. L., Barker, E. T., & Almeida, D. M. (2003). Parents do matter: Trajectories of change in externalizing and internalizing problems in early adolescence. Child Development, 74(2), 578e594. Georgiou, S. N., & Fanti, K. A. (2014). Transactional associations between mother-child conflict and child externalising and internalising problems. Educational Psychology, 34(2), 133e153. Gray, M. G., & Steinberg, L. (1999). Unpacking authoritative parenting: Reassessing a multidimensional construct. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 61, 574e587. Hamza, C., & Willoughby, T. (2011). Perceived parental monitoring, adolescent disclosure, and adolescent depressive symptomology: A longitudinal examination. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 40(7), 902e915. Hoeve, M., Dubas, J. S., Eichelsheim, V. I., van der Laan, P. H., Smeenk, W., & Gerris, J. R. M. (2009). The relationship between parenting and delinquency: A meta-analysis. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 37, 749e775. Kerr, M., & Stattin, H. (2000). What parents know, how they know it, and several forms of adolescent adjustment: Further support for a reinterpretation of monitoring. Developmental Psychology, 36(3), 366e380. Liu, J. (2004). Childhood externalizing behavior: Theory and implications. Journal of Child and Adolescent Psychiatric Nursing, 17(3), 93e103. Luthar, S. S., Cicchetti, D., & Becker, B. (2000). The construct of resilience: A critical evaluation and guidelines for future work. Child Development, 71, 543e562. Madigan, S., Atkinson, L., Laurin, K., & Benoit, D. (2013). Attachment and internalizing behavior in early childhood: A meta-analysis. Developmental Psychology, 49(4), 672e689. Mills, R. L., & Rubin, K. H. (1998). Are behavioural and psychological control both differentially associated with childhood aggression and social withdrawal? Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 30(2), 132e136. Murray, K. W., Dwyer, K. M., Rubin, K. H., Knighton-Wisor, S., & Booth-LaForce, C. (2014). Parent-child relationships, parental psychological control, and aggression: Maternal and paternal relationships. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 43(8), 1361e1373. Pettit, G. S., Laird, R. D., Dodge, K. A., Bates, J. E., & Criss, M. M. (2001). Antecedents and behaviour-problem outcomes of parental monitoring and psychological control in early adolescence. Child Development, 72(2), 583e598. Pleck, J. H., & Mascaidrelli, B. P. (2004). Parental involvement: Levels, sources and consequences. In M. E. Lamb (Ed.), The role of the father in child development. New Jersey: John Wiley and Sons. Plunkett, S. W., Henry, C. S., Robinson, L. C., Behnke, A., & Falcon, P. C., III (2007). Adolescent perceptions of parental behaviors, adolescent self-esteem, and adolescent depressed mood. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 16, 760e772. Rogers, K. N., Buchanan, C. M., & Winchell, M. E. (2003). Psychological control during early adolescence: Links to adjustment in differing parent/adolescent dyads. Journal of Early Adolescence, 23(4), 349e383. Schacht, P. M., Cummings, E. M., & Davies, P. T. (2009). Fathering in family context and child adjustment: A longitudinal analysis. Journal of Family Psychology, 23(6), 790e797.
M. Symeou, S. Georgiou / Journal of Adolescence 60 (2017) 104e113
113
Schludermann, E. H., & Schludermann, S. M. (1988). Children's report on parent behavior for older children and adolescents. Winnipeg, Canada: University of Manitoba, Department of Psychology. Soucy, N., & Larose, S. (2000). Attachment and control in family and mentoring contexts as determinants of adolescent adjustment to college. Journal of Family Psychology, 14(1), 125e143. Sourander, A., Helstel€ a, L., & Helenius, H. (1999). Parent-adolescent agreement on emotional and behavioral problems. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 34(12), 657e663. Steinberg, L. (1990). Interdependence in the family: Autonomy, conflict, and harmony in the parenteadolescent relationship. In S. S. Feldman, & G. R. Elliott (Eds.), At the threshold: The developing adolescent (pp. 255e276). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Tanner, J., Davies, S., & O'Grady, B. (1999). Whatever happened to yesterday's rebels? Longitudinal effects of teenage delinquency on education and occupational outcomes. Social Problems, 46(2), 250e274. Wei, C., & Kendall, P. C. (2014). Child perceived parenting behavior: Childhood anxiety and related symptoms. Child & Family Behavior Therapy, 36, 1e18. Williams, S. K., & Kelly, F. D. (2005). Relationships among involvement, attachment, and behavioral problems in adolescence: Examining father's influence. Journal of Early Adolescence, 25, 168e196.