Swipe om te navigeren naar een ander artikel
Theory and research suggest that adolescents differ in their appraisals and coping reactions in response to parental regulation. Less is known, however, about factors that determine these differences in adolescents’ responses. In this study, we examined whether adolescents' appraisals and coping reactions depend upon parents’ situation-specific autonomy-supportive or controlling communication style (i.e., the situation) in interaction with adolescents’ past experiences with general autonomy-supportive parenting (i.e., the parenting context). Whereas in Study 1 (N = 176) adolescents’ perceived general autonomy-supportive parenting context was assessed at one point in time, in Study 2 (N = 126) it was assessed multiple times across a 6-year period, allowing for an estimation of trajectories of perceived autonomy-supportive parenting context. In each study, adolescents read a vignette-based scenario depicting a situation of maternal regulation (i.e., a request to study more), which was communicated in either an autonomy-supportive or a controlling way. Following this scenario, they reported upon their appraisals and their anticipated coping reactions. Results of each study indicated that both the autonomy-supportive (relative to the controlling) situation and the perceived autonomy-supportive parenting context generally related to more positive appraisals (i.e., more autonomy need satisfaction, less autonomy need frustration), as well as to more constructive coping responses (i.e., less oppositional defiance and submission, more negotiation and accommodation). In addition, situation × context interactions were found, whereby adolescents growing up in a more autonomy-supportive context seemed to derive greater benefits from the exposure to an autonomy-supportive situation and reacted more constructively to a controlling situation.
Log in om toegang te krijgen
Met onderstaand(e) abonnement(en) heeft u direct toegang:
Barber, B. K., & Xia, M. (2013). The centrality of control to parenting and its effects. In R. E. Larzelere, A. S. Morris, & A. W. Harrist (Eds.), Authoritative parenting: Synthesizing nurturance and discipline for optimal child development. Washington, DC: APA.
Baudat, S., Zimmermann, G., Antonietti, J. P., & Van Petegem, S. (2016). Maternal reaction to an adolescent alcohol use episode: Enforcing control will lead to change motivation? Drugs: Education, Prevention and Policy. doi: 10.1080/09687637.2016.1192584.
Blumer, H. (1969). Symbolic interactionism: Perspective and method. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Erlbaum.
Brandtstädter, J., & Rothermund, K. (2002). The life-course dynamics of goal pursuit and goal adjustment: A two-process framework. Developmental Review, 22, 117–150. CrossRef
Bronfenbrenner, U., & Morris, P. A. (2006). The bioecological model of human development. In R. M. Lerner (Ed.), Handbook of Child Development: Vol. 1. Theoretical models of human development (6th ed., pp. 793–828). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Chen, B., Soenens, B., Vansteenkiste, M., Van Petegem, S., & Beyers, W. (2016). Where do the cultural differences in dynamics of controlling parenting lie? Adolescents as active agents in the perception of and coping with parental behavior. Psychologica Belgica, 56, 169–192. doi: 10.5334/pb.306. CrossRef
Cohen, J., Cohen, P., West, S. G., & Aiken, L. S. (2003). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences (3rd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. New York, NY: Plenum. CrossRef
Garnefski, N., & Kraaij, V. (2006). The cognitive emotion regulation questionnaire: Development of a short 18-item version (CERQ-short). Personality and Individual Differences, 41, 1045–1053. CrossRef
Grolnick, W. S. (2003). The psychology of parental control: How well-meant parenting backfires. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Grolnick, W. S., Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1997). Internalization within the family: The self-determination theory perspective. In J. E. Grusec, & L. Kuczynski (Eds.), Parenting and children's internalization of values: A handbook of contemporary theory (pp. 135–161). New York, NY: Wiley.
Grolnick, W. S., Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (1991). Inner resources for school achievement: Motivational mediators of children's perceptions of their parents. Journal of Educational Psychology, 83, 508–517. CrossRef
Kass, R. E., & Raftery, A. E. (1995). Bayes factors. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 90, 773–795. CrossRef
Kliewer, W., Sandler, I., & Wolchik, S. (1994). Family socialization of threat appraisal and coping: Coaching, modeling, and family context. In K. Hurrelman, & F. Nestmann (Eds.), Social networks and social support in childhood and adolescence (pp. 271–291). New York, NY: de Gruyter.
Kuczynski, L. (2003). Beyond bidirectionality: Bilateral conceptual frameworks for understanding dynamics in parent–child relations (pp. 1–24). In L. Kuczynski (Ed.), Handbook of dynamics in parent–child relations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Maccoby, E. E. (2007). Historical overview of socialization research and theory. In J. E. Grusec, & P. D. Hastings (Eds.), Handbook of socialization: Theory and research (pp. 13–41). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Mead, G. H. (1934). Mind, self and society from the point of view of a social behaviorist. Chicago, IL: University Press of Chicago.
Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (2012). Mplus user's guide (7th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.
Nagin, D. S. (2005). Group-based modeling of development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. CrossRef
Nolen-Hoeksma, S. (1998). Ruminative coping with depression. In J. Heckhausen, G. S. Dweck (Eds.). Motivation and self-regulation across the life span (pp. 237–256). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossRef
Nucci, L. (1996). Morality and personal freedom. In E. S. Reed, E. Turiel, & T. Brown (Eds.), Knowledge and values (pp. 41–60). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Nylund, K. L., Asparoutiov, T., & Muthen, B. O. (2007). Deciding on the number of classes in latent class analysis and growth mixture modeling: A Monte Carlo study. Structural Equation Modeling, 14, 535–569. CrossRef
Pomerantz, E. M., & Eaton, M. M. (2000). Developmental differences in children’s conceptions of parental control: “They love me, but they make me feel incompetent”. Merill-Palmer Quarterly, 46, 140–167. doi: 10.1111/j.2040-0209.2010.00352_2.x.
Rowe, S., Zimmer-Gembeck, M. J., Rudolph, J., Nesdale, D., & Gowney, G. A. (2015). A longitudinal study of rejecting and autonomy-restrictive parenting, rejection sensitivity, and socioemotional symptoms in early adolescents. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 43, 1107–1118. doi: 10.1007/s10802-014-9966-6. CrossRefPubMed
Skinner, E. A., & Edge, K. (2002). Self-determination, coping and development. In E. L. Deci, & R. M. Ryan (Eds.), Self-determination theory: Extensions and applications (pp. 297–337). Rochester, NY: University of Rochester Press.
Skinner, E. A., & Wellborn, J. G. (1994). Coping during childhood and adolescence: A motivational perspective. In R. Lerner, D. Featherman, & M. Perlmutter (Eds.), Lifespan development and behavior (pp. 91–133). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Smetana, J. G. (2006). Social-cognitive domain theory: Consistencies and variations in children’s moral and social judgments. In M. Killen, & J. G. Smetana (Eds.), Handbook of moral development (pp. 119–153). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Soenens, B., Vansteenkiste, M., Lens, W., Luyckx, K., Goossens, L., Beyers, W., & Ryan, R. M. (2007). Conceptualizing parental autonomy support: Adolescent perceptions of promotion of independence versus promotion of volitional functioning. Developmental Psychology, 43, 633–646. doi: 10.1037/0012-16220.127.116.113. CrossRefPubMed
Van Petegem, S., Vansteenkiste, M., Soenens, B., Zimmermann, G., Antonietti, J.-P., Baudat, S., & Audenaert, E. (2017). When do adolescents accept or defy to maternal prohibitions? The role of social domain and communication style. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 46, 1022–1037. doi: 10.1007/s10964-016-0562-7.
Vanhalst, J., Soenens, B., Luyckx, K., Van Petegem, S., Weeks, M. S., & Ascher, S. R. (2015). Why do the lonely stay lonely? Chronically lonely adolescents’ attributions and emotions in situations of social inclusion and exclusion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 109, 932–948. doi: 10.1037/pspp0000051. CrossRefPubMed
Vansteenkiste, M., Simons, J., Lens, W., Sheldon, K., & Deci, E. L. (2004). Motivation learning, performance, and persistence: The synergistic effects of intrinsic goal contents and autonomy-supportive contexts. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87, 246–260. doi: 10.1037/0022-3518.104.22.168. CrossRefPubMed
Vansteenkiste, M., Simons, J., Lens, W., Soenens, B., & Matos, L. (2005). Examining the motivational impact of intrinsic versus extrinsic goal framing and autonomy-supportive versus internally controlling communication style on early adolescents’ academic achievement. Child Development, 76, 483–501. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8624.2005.00858.x. CrossRefPubMed
Zimmer-Gembeck, M. J., Ducat, W., & Collins, W. A. (2011). Autonomy development during adolescence. In B. B. Brown, & M. Prinstein (Eds.), Encyclopedia of adolescence (pp. 66–76). New York: Academic. CrossRef
Zimmer-Gembeck, M. J., & Skinner, E. A. (2016). The development of coping and regulation: Implications for psychopathology and resilience. In D. Cicchetti (Ed.), Developmental psychopathology (3rd ed., Vol. 4, pp. 485–544). New York, NY: Wiley.
- Does General Parenting Context Modify Adolescents' Appraisals and Coping with a Situation of Parental Regulation? The Case of Autonomy-Supportive Parenting
Stijn Van Petegem
Melanie J. Zimmer-Gembeck
- Springer US