Scholarly article on topic 'Parenting styles and Individualistic and Collectivistic Values (Considering Transition Mechanism or Inter-generation Non-transition)'

Parenting styles and Individualistic and Collectivistic Values (Considering Transition Mechanism or Inter-generation Non-transition) Academic research paper on "Economics and business"

CC BY-NC-ND
0
0
Share paper
OECD Field of science
Keywords
{"parenting styles" / "inter-generation transition" / individualism / collectivism}

Abstract of research paper on Economics and business, author of scientific article — Azam Farah Bidjari, Asma Zahmatkesh

Abstract The aim of this study is considering the relation between the amount of individualistic and collectivistic values in three generations of daughters, mothers and grandmothers in Kerman (a city in south of Iran) and their educational styles and the relation between educational styles with the amount of individualistic and collectivistic values in children. The case study in this research consists of 120 girls and women above 16 years old that have been chosen by available sampling. Tools of research in this consideration are demographic, individualistic, collectivistic and parental connection questionnaires. The data have been analyzed by the aid of descriptive and inferential statistics (T test, analysis of one way variance test and Pierson coefficient). Although the results are not meaningful statistically they indicate an increase in individualistic values and reduction of collectivistic values from the first generation to the third generation in families. Also, difference in individualistic values in educated people as well as people with different orders of birth is significant. In this research, 94.4% of the cases were brought up with authoritative style and 5.6% were brought up with authoritarian styles there is a significant difference between the amount of tolerance and parental control in different generations was not observed.

Academic research paper on topic "Parenting styles and Individualistic and Collectivistic Values (Considering Transition Mechanism or Inter-generation Non-transition)"

Available online at www.sciencedirect.com

SciVerse ScienceDirect PfOCSCl ¡0

Social and Behavioral Sciences

Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 30 (2011) 2431 - 2437

WCPCG-2011

Parenting styles and individualistic and collectivistic values (Considering transition mechanism or inter-generation

non-transition)

Azam Farah Bidjaria *, Asma Zahmatkeshb

aFaculty of Education & Psychology, Al-Zahra University, Vanak, Tehran - P.O Box 1993891176, Iran bFaculty of Education & Psychology, Al-Zahra University, Vanak, Tehran - P.O Box 1993891176, Iran

Abstract

The aim of this study is considering the relation between the amount of individualistic and collectivistic values in three generations of daughters, mothers and grandmothers in Kerman (a city in south of Iran) and their educational styles and the relation between educational styles with the amount of individualistic and collectivistic values in children. The case study in this research consists of 120 girls and women above 16 years old that have been chosen by available sampling. Tools of research in this consideration are demographic, individualistic, collectivistic and parental connection questionnaires. The data have been analyzed by the aid of descriptive and inferential statistics (T test, analysis of one way variance test and Pierson coefficient). Although the results are not meaningful statistically they indicate an increase in individualistic values and reduction of collectivistic values from the first generation to the third generation in families. Also, difference in individualistic values in educated people as well as people with different orders of birth is significant. In this research, 94.4% of the cases were brought up with authoritative style and 5.6% were brought up with authoritarian styles there is a significant difference between the amount of tolerance and parental control in different generations was not observed.

© 2011Publishedby Elsevier Ltd. Selection and/or peer-review under responsibility of the 2nd World Conference on Psychology, Counselling and Guidance.

Keywords: parenting styles, inter-generation transition, individualism, collectivism.

1. Introduction

Many researchers have found out that in reality the educational styles are not transmitted from one generation to another (Campell & Gilmore, 2007; Covell, Gruesec & King, 1995). Education usually is defined as a socialization method which plays a role in the individual's development (Hill, Mullis, Readdict & Waters, 2000). The great events of the twentieth century such as crises, wars and the increase in divorce rate have led to some changes in family behavior and structure, directly or indirectly (Elder, 1974, 1994). In the latter years of the twentieth century, as baby death toll dropped, some attention was bestowed upon children's rights (Hulbert, 2003). Based on research studies in 1920s, researchers described children as vulnerable. Therefore, the value of Warmth increased. In the early 1940s Freud's idea of the importance of mothers in the early childhood was attended, and in the 1950s Bowlby's attachment model showed that parents play an important role in their children's development.

1 E-mail address: a.fbidjari@alzahra.ac.ir

2 Student in psychology

ELSEVIER

1877-0428 © 2011 Published by Elsevier Ltd. Selection and/or peer-review under responsibility of the 2nd World Conference on Psychology,

Counselling and Guidance.

doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.10.475

Pediatricians, as well, increasingly become interested in parenting control. For example, Skinner and Spock advised parents to exert more control over their children. But later in 1960s parents were advised to lower their control and just encourage their children to make correct decisions (Hulbert, 2003).

Because Baumrind's educational models are multidimensional they are used in many educational researches (Brenner & Fox, 1999; Dominguez & Carton, 1997; Dornbusch and et.al., 1987). Because the interest in and the use of warmth and control have increased in education, Baumrind recognized four types of main educational styles: authoritative education, despotic education, indifferent education and ignoring/ostracizing education (Baumrind, 1991). These four types are recognized by different levels of acceptance (nurturance and warmth), communication, reasoning, control (strictness) of the parents. Rankin (2005) describes severity and indifference as the two ends of a spectrum in which indifference is having very low control and severity very high control. Parents' warmth is their emotions and demonstrating of them to the children. Ostracizing parents is the opposite end of warmth spectrum. Authoritative parenting consists of low control with high acceptance and warmth (Baumrind, 1991).

Many researchers have found strong connections between educational styles and cultural variables like individualism and collectivism (Baumrind, 1991). Individualism and collectivism have strong connections with education and its styles (Bamerind, 1991; Jose & et.al., 2000). Markus and Kitayama (1991) describe collectivism as a social model of closed relationship of individuals who consider themselves as dependent members of a collectivistic unite. They describe individualism as individual autonomy and personal independence. Individualism proceeds to emphasize independence and personal achievement, so it goes in the direction of applying an education that focus more on lower control and higher warmth (Elder, 1974; Stearns, 2003). Many researches show the relation between authoritative parenting and individualism (Dornbusch & et.al., 1987; Herz & Gullone, 1999; Kim and Runner, 2002). Many researchers have found strong relation between despotic parenting and collectivism (Hertow & Gallen, 1999). When the society moves in the direction of less collectivism and more individualism, one can see and increase in warmth and a decrease in control in educational styles.

Do these changes within the family show that the inter-generational influence is more than the intra-familial influence? Transition and continuance are terms used in studying behavior and educational values and their existence (or lack of them) form one generation to another one. Inter-generational study includes both intra-generational effects in family and inter-generational effects. There are unique familial elements which survive generations, but there are also social elements which influence the transition of some things to the next generation (Hareven, 1978). Similarly, one can see this among groups. There are also some historical elements that can cause inter-generational breaks, such as the increase in the number of the girls who enter university. In the last hundred years, there have been great changes in despotic traditional collectivistic parenting styles. With the increase of nonmanual jobs (industrial) in twentieth century, a change happened in educational values from controlling to autonomic. This reflects the collectivistic increase in individualistic values and it can be observed in the changes that have happened in this era's educational styles (Biblarz, Bengston & Bukur, 1996). Bengston (1975) studied collectivism and individualism in three generations of families. He realized that individualism has increased noticeably from grandparents (first generation) to grandchildren (third generation). First generation's ability regarding individualism and collectivism index is at the collectivism pole, while the third generation's ability is at the individualism pole. Second generation's ability stands between collectivism-individualism of the first and third generation. Since social values of individualism and collectivism are strongly related to educational styles (Baumrind, 1991) and it seems that educational styles have changed from despotic to authoritative and to indifferent (Campell & Gillmore, 2007; Elder, 1974; Stearns, 2003; Woods & et.al., 1960). It is possible that individualism and collectivism follow the same method; in other words, since educational styles reflect more individualism in time, it seems that people have become more individualistic and less collectivistic. Hypotheses of the research are as follows;

1)Individualistic values have increased from generation one to three and it is meaningfully different from one generation to another. 2) Collectivistic values have decreased from generation one to third and it is meaningfully different from one generation to another. 3) Level of warmth (care) has increased from first generation to third. 4)

Level of control (perceived support) has decreased from the first generation to third and in families it is meaningfully different from one generation to another. 5) Individualism in the grandmothers (G1) had a negative association with parents' control (as reported by their daughters (G2)). 6) Individualism in mothers (G2) had a negative association with parents' control (as reported by their daughters (G3)). 7) Individualism in grandmothers (G1) has a positive association with parents' warmth (as reported by their daughters (G2)). 8) Individualism in mothers (G2) has a positive association with parents' warmth (as reported by their daughters (G3)).

2. Methodology

This is a corelational research. The research case study consists of all Kermanian women and girls above the age of 16, since the social effect of family is stronger on girls (E. G. Amato & Booth, 1997; Amato & Cheadle, 2005; Campell and Gilmore, 2007; Caspi & Elder, 1988). Three generation selected for this research, consist of (G1) group which mostly belonged to the era before the revolution, (G2) group that mostly belong to evolution era and (G3) group which belong to the era after revolution. The method of nonrandom and available sampling was used. Sample consists of 40 daughters, 40 mothers and 40 grandmothers, some of them were relatives, and therefore 40 daughters, 32 mothers and 26 grandmothers were studied.

Measuring tools

a) Demographic questionnaire including demographic information of the participants (age, education, order of birth and maternal status)

b) For measuring individualism-collectivism (INDCOL), Triandis and Singelis (1994) questionnaire was used. This 31-item scale is consisted of a 9 degree Lickert scale (1= completely disagree to 9= completely agree). In a research done by Azam Azad and Tavakoli (2007) in Iran the validity of individualistic and collectivistic indexes was studied by calculating Cronbasch's Alpha, resulting in 0.646 for horizontal individualism, 0.744 for vertical individualism, 0.732 for horizontal collectivism and 0.751 for vertical collectivism. Validity of individualistic and collectivistic indexes in this research was studied by using Cronbasch's alpha multiple, resulting in 0.72 for individualism and 0.78 for collectivism.

c) Parenting connection tool_mother form: all participants filled out the parent -child connection questionnaire (PBI; Parker, Tupling & Brown, 1979) based on their perception of their mothers' education till they were 16. PBI questionnaire has 25 items and consists of 2 scales: perceived maternal care (12 items) and over perceived nurturance (13 items). The above mentioned scale enjoys a good validity and reliability and has been used in research studies in the past twenty five years numerously (such as Circes, Krockenberg, 2006; Linhout, Mrkus, Hogendick, Bourst F. Mingy, Episen Fon, VanDike and Bow, 2006; Manian, Papadix, Straman and Essex, 2006; Parker et al., 1979). Parenting control and attention scale's validity in the present research was studied with Cronbach's alpha coefficient, which with its use the validity of attention scale is 0.90 and the validity of control scale is 0.89.

Descriptive statistical index (abundance, mean, average, mode, standard deviation and variance) has been used for processing data. In addition, referential statistical index (dependent T-Test method, analysis of one way variance (ANOVA) and Pierson correlation)

3. Findings

Hypothesis one: it states that individualistic values have increased from generation one to generation 2 and they are meaningfully different from one generation to another.

To study this hypothesis, ANOVA was used. Its results are shown in table 1.

Table 1. The results of ANOVA for comparing individualism between 3 generations

Statistical index Total square root Freedom degree Average square root F Significance level

Within groups 16749/91 116 144/396 0/197

Between groups 475/671 2 237/835 1/647

Sum 17225/58 118

Based on the results shown in table 1-2, there is meaningful difference between the average individualism in three generations. [F(2, 116)(p>0.05)]

Hypothesis two: it states that collectivistic values have decreased from one generation to another and they are meaningfully different from one generation to another.

To study this hypothesis ANOVA was used and its results are shown in table 2.

Table 2. The results of ANOVA for comparing collectivism between three generations

Statistical index Total square root Freedom degree Average square root F Significance level

Within groups 18988.77 114 166.568 0.677

Between groups 130.31 2 65.154 0.391

Sum 19119.08 116

Based on results shown in table 1-5, there is meaningful difference between the members of the three generations. [F(2,114), P>0.05]

Hypothesis three: it states that the level of warmth (attention) has increased from generation one to third. To study this hypothesis ANOVA was used and its results can be seen in table 3.

Table 3. Comparing perceived warmth in three generations

Statistical index Dispersal sources Total square root dF Average square root F Significance level

Within groups 4834.615 114 42.409 0.127

Between groups 178.535 2 89.265 2.105

Sum 5013.145 116

Based on the results shown in table 1-8 there is no meaningful difference between perceived warmth in three generations. [F (2,114), p>0.05]

Hypothesis four: it states that the control level (perceived nurturance) has decreased from generation one to generation three and that is meaningfully different in families of different generations.

To study this hypothesis ANOVA was used and its results are shown in table 4.

Table 4. Comparing perceived nurturance in three generations

Statistical index Dispersal sources Total square root dF Average square root F Significance level

Within groups 7071.757 2 66.715 0.117

Between groups 291.693 106 145.848 2.186

Sum 7363.45 108

Based on the results shown in table 4, there is meaningful difference between 3 generations. [F(2,106) p>0.05] To study fifth to eighth hypotheses correlation coefficient was used.

Table 5. Correlation between individualism and the level of perceived nurturance and warmth

Significance level correlation

Mother's individualism with daughter's perceived nurturance 0/08 -0/284

Mother's individualism with daughter's perceived warmth 0/761 0/05

Grandmother's individualism with daughter's perceived nurturance 0/064 -0/331

Grandmother's individualism with daughter's perceived warmth 0/428 0/132

As it can be seen in the table there is significant association between mother's individualism and daughter's perceived nurturance, between grandmother's individualism and mother's perceived nurturance, between mother's individualism with daughter's perceived warmth and between grandmother's individualism and mother's perceived warmth. (p>0.05)

4. Conclusion

Although the findings show that individualistic values have increased in families from generation one to third, but regarding the results this increase is not meaningful. The result of T- test for dependent groups shows that individualistic values have increased meaningfully from generation one to three, but the increase in individualistic values from generation one to two and two to three is not meaningful. The results are in accord with Bengston's research (1975), which showed that individualism has increased in three generations. He explains the reasons behind these results as follows: the inter-generational influence is higher than intra-familial influence; in other words, although the participants of this research have been groups of three members of families, he realized that these groups change over time. It seems that changes in their age and historical changes, affect this research as time passes. It is quiet natural that human beings find mental independence to move from a traditional society to a modern society, and such independence surely needs an amount of individualism. To sum up, one can conclude that although modernism has led to an increase in people's individualism, but regarding historical and cultural effects of the society and the long history of urbanity in Iran, such an increase is not significant.

The average collectivistic values show that collectivistic values have decreased from generation one to three, but that is not significant. T-test results for dependent groups show that collectivistic values have decreased from generation one to third but that is not significant. In addition, collectivistic values have increased from generation one to two and it is significant. Collectivistic values also have decreased from generation two to three meaningfully. Here one should pay attention to the fact that generation two consists of people who have participated in Islamic Revolution and they are the ones who made it a success. Besides with paying attention to the fact that collectivism and care for others are of the main values of the revolution, level of collectivism has increased from generation one to two. This indicates that inter-generational effects are more influential than intra-familial effects and it seems that as time passes both changes in people's age and historical changes influence the study. All in all it can be said that collectivistic values which are affected by inter- and intra-generational elements, have increased in the research society because of Islamic Revolution of Iran from generation one to generation two. On the other hand, modernity's influence in the third generation has led to a decrease in collectivistic values in the research society form generation two to three. Perceived warmth has decreased from generation one to two and has increased from generation 2 to three. But this increase or decrease in the families is not significant. Average amount of perceived nurturance has decreased in families from generation one to three but based on the results it is not significant. The results indicate that there is a negative association between the level of individualism and parenting control, but this association is not significant. Besides there is a positive association between individualism and parenting warmth,

but this is not significant either. Many researchers have found strong connections between educational styles and cultural variables such as social life originality and individual life originality (Baumrind, 1991) .Studies have pointed out that in the last 50 years American people have become increasingly individualistic (Bengston, 1975; Elder, 1994; Green, 2008). Since this change has proceeded in the direction of emphasizing independence and personal achievement, therefore, it is proceeding towards applying an education which focus on less control and higher warmth (Elder, 1974; Steam, 2003; woods & et al., 1960). Generally it can be said that since parents' educational styles have not change much from first generation one to the third and 94.4 percent of people had authoritative education style and 5.6 percent had despotic educational style, therefore there has not been a meaningful difference from generation one to three. Studying the amount of women's individualistic and collectivistic values in these generations show that although modernism has caused individualistic values to increase, but this increase has not been meaningful because of the history of urbanity in Iran. On the other hand, Islamic revolution has led to an increase in collectivistic values and morale of the second generation. Modernism has caused a decrease in collectivistic values from generation 2 to three. Dominant educational style in the mentioned society is authoritative and little percentage of people has had a despotic educational style. This can be the result of the influence of religious thoughts in Iran (paying a lot of attention to children and their accepting their parents' orders) and traditional structure of Kerman city which necessitates the authoritative educational style.

References

Amato, P. R., & Booth, A. (1997). A generation at risk: Growing up id an era of family upheaval. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Amato, P. R., & Cheadle, J. (2005). The long reach of divorce: Divorce and child well- being across three generations [Electronic version].

Journal of Marriage ana Family, 67, 191-206. Azam Azad, M.; Tavakoly, A. (2007). Individualism collectivism and religion. Quartry Journal of Iranian Aiihciatihd Cultural Study and Communication, 125-101 (9)3.

Baumrind, D. (1991). Parenting styles and adolescent development. In R. M. Lerner, A. C. Peterson, & J. Brooks-Gunn, (Eds.), Encyclopedia of

aaaleicedce (Vol. 2, pp. 746-758). New York: Garland Publishing, Inc. Bengston, V. L. (1975). Generation and family effects in value socialization [Electronic version]. American Sociological Review, 4(, 358-371. Biblarz, T. J., Bengston, V. L., & Bucur, A. (1996). Social mobility across three generations [Electronic version]. Journal of Marriage and the

jamily, 58, i88- Saa.

Brenner, V., & Fox, R. A. (1999). An empirically derived classification of parenting practices. Journal of Genetic Psychology, 16(, 343-357. Campbell, J., & Gilmore, L. (2007). Intergenerational continuities and discontinuities in parenting styles. Australian J/urdal of Psychology, 59, 140-150.

Caspi, A., & Elder, G. H. (1988). Emergent family patterns: The intergenerational construction of problem behavior and relationships. In R. A.

Hinde & J. Stevenson-Hinde (Eds.), Relationships within families: Mutual influences (pp. 218-240). New York: Oxford University Press. Covell, K., Grusec, J. E., & King, G. (1995). The intergenerational transmission of maternal discipline and standards for behavior [Electronic

version]. Social Development, 4, 3S-43. Dominguez, M. M., & Carton, J. S. (1997). The relationship between self-actualization and parenting style. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 1S, 1093-1101.

Dornbusch, S. M., Ritter, P. L., Leiderman, P. H., Roberts, D. F., & Fraleigh, M. J. (1987). The relation of parenting style to adolescent school

performance. Child Development, 58, 1S44-1S57. Elder, G. H. (1974). Children of the Great Depression. In Children of the Great Depression: Social change in life experience, (pp. 271-297).

Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Elder, G. H. (1994). Time, human agency, and social change: Perspectives on the life course [Electronic version]. Social Psychology Quarterly, 57, 4-15.

Greene, T. W. (2008). Three ideologies of individualism: Toward assimilating a theory of individualisms and their consequences [Electronic

version]. Critical Psychology, 34, 117-137. Hill, E. W., Mullis, R. L., Readdick, C. A., & Walters, C. M. (2000). Intergenerational perceptions of attachment and prosocial behavior.

Marriage and Family Review, 30, 59- 72. Hulbert, A. (2003). Raising America: Experts, parents, and a century of advice about children. New York: Random House, Inc. Jose, P. E., Huntsinger, C. S., Huntsinger, P. R., & Liaw, F. (2000). Parental values and practices relevant to young children's social development in Taiwan and the United States. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 31, 677-699.

Kim, K., & Rohner, R. P. (2002). Parental warmth, control, and involvement in schooling: Predicting academic achievement among Korean American adolescents. Jouro/l cfCrcii Cultur/lPiyaAclcgy, 33, 127-138.

Markus, H. R., & Kitayama, S. (1991). Culture and self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. PiyaAklkgia/l Review, 98, 224253.

Parker, G., Tupling, H., & Brown, L. B. (1979). A parental bonding instrument. BritilA Jouro/l of Mahia/lPiyaAology, 52, 1-12.

Rankin, J. L. (2005). Parenting experts: Their advice, the research, and getting it right. Westport, CT: Praeger Publishing.

Stearns, P. N. (2003). Aoxioui p/raoti: A Hiitory of Moharo CAilhra/riog io Amaria/. New York: New York University Press.

Singelis, T.M., Triandis, H.C., Bhawuk, D.P.S., & Gelfand, M.J. (1995). Horizontal and vertical aspects of individualism and collectivism: A theoretical and measurement refinement. Croii-Cultur/l Raia/rrA, 29, 240-275.

Woods, P. J., Glavin, K. B., & Kettle, C. M. (1960). A mother-daughter comparison on selected aspects of child rearing in a high socioeconomic group [Electronic version]. CAilhDavalopmaot, 31, 121-128.