3031113; “co‘B-‘mgmgs 0F AITTETUDw TOWARD gm AND OTHERSIE .1061}?sz ”THESIS FOB THE 1339333991.; MCHIGASQTATE mum-a, 3"! :. ' HEI'FUN 3100mm 19.69 . LIBRARY Michigan State UHIVCI‘Q5t‘y ‘m‘C-Ca. we. ABSTRACT SOME CORRELATES OF ATTITUDES TOWARD SELF AND OTHERS IN ADOLESCENCE BY HEIEUN RYOO KIM This study investigated the possible relationships between adolescents' attitudes toward persons and their per- ceptions of parents' child—rearing patterns. Based upon previous studies, it was hypothesized that: (a)adolescents' favorable attitudes toward self, peers, and parents would be associated with perceived parents' loving techniques and symbolic-love reward; (b) adolescents' unfavorable attitudes toward self, peers, and parents would be associated with per- ceived parents' rejecting techniques and direct-object punish- ment. The subjects, whose mean age was 17 years, were 39 boys and 45 girls in high school. To measure attitudes in ado- lescents, a Sentence Completion Test was used; and to measure child-rearing behaviors of parents, Roe-Siegelman's Parent- Child Relations Questionnaire was used. Test—retest administration and analysis were carried out to obtain the reliability of the Sentence Completion Test. Inter-judge correlation coefficient(.86(r(.96) and test-retest correlation coefficient(.49 O I" \ 6W) 6% \L) ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I wish to express my sincere appreciation to Dr. John P. McKinney, chairman of the thesis committee, for his patience, valuable guidance, and continuing encouragement in this research. My appreciation is also extended to Dr. John H. Wakeley and Dr. Ellen A. Strommen, for their helpful suggestions and their willingness to serve on the committee. My special thanks go to the principal, Rev. R. Sheehan and his students of the St. Joseph's High School for their participation in this research. V I am especially grateful to my husband, ijin Kim, M.D., for his support and encouragement to bring the completion of my study. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ............................................ ii LIST OF TABLES ............................................. iv LIST OF FIGURES ...... . .................... . ........... ..... vi INTRODUCTION ................. ...... ........................ 1 METHOD.... ...... ..... ................. ..... ............... . 9 RESULTS .................................................... 18 DISCUSSION ................................................. 25 SUMMARY .................................................... 43 REFERENCES ................................................. 46 APPENDICES I. Description of Parent-Child Relations Variable. ....... 49 II. Sentence Completion Test .................. . ........... 52 III. PCR Questionnaire .................. . .................. 54 IV. Means and standard deviations of all Ss' attitude scores ...... . ................ .. ....... ......... ....... 64 V. Means and standard deviations of male Ss' attitude scores and of PCR scores....... ....... ......... ..... .. 65 VI. Means and standard deviations of female 88' attitude scores and of PCR scores.......... ........ ... 66 VII. Correlations between adolescents' attitudes and total patterns of parents' child—rearing practices.... 67 iii Table l. Inter-judge reliability coefficients for Ss' attitude scores ....... ..... ..... ... ................... 2. Test—retest reliability coefficients for Ss' attitude scores..... ........ .............. ............ 3. Correlations between male Ss' attitude scores and scores of their fathers' perceived child-rearing practiceSoo ....... 00000000000000.0000... ...... 00 ...... 4. Correlations between male Ss' attitude scores and scores of their mothers' perceived child-rearing practices 0000000000 0000.00.00.00000 000000000 000.0 00000 5. Correlations between female 58' attitude scores and scores of their fathers' perceived child—rearing practices00 00000 00000000000000.00000000 000000000 00.0.. 6. Correlations between female Ss' attitude scores and scores of their mothers' perceived child-rearing practices.... ............................. ... ......... Al. Means and standard deviations of Ss' attitude scores. A2. Means and standard deviations of male Ss' attitude scores... 000000 00000000000000.00000000000000.0000... A3. Means and standard deviations of male 55' PCR ScoreSooooo 000000000 00. 0000000 0 00000 0000000 0000000000 A4. Means and standard deviations of female Ss' attitude - scores. 0000000 0000000000000 000000 000. 00000 000.0 000000 A5. Means and standard deviations of female Ss' PCR Scores... 00000 000.000 000000 0000000000 000000 00000000.. A6. Correlations between male Ss' attitude scores and LIST OF TABLES scores of their fathers' perceived child-rearing practiceSooooo 00000000 0 00000 0.00 000000000000 0 00000000 iv page 18 19 20 21 22 23 64 . 65 65 66 66 67 LIST OF TABLES (Cont.) Table page A7. A8. A9. Correlations between male Ss' attitude scores and scores of their mothers' perceived child-rearing practiCeSoooooooo 00000 0. 0000000000 0 00000 00.000.000.068 Correlations between female Ss' attitude scores and scores of their fathers' perceived child—rearing praCticeS 0000000000000000 0000000000000 0000000 000000069 Correlations between female 85' attitude scores and scores of their mothers' perceived child—rearing practices ...... . ............... . ............. ....... 70 LIST OF FIGURES Figure page 1. Relationships between boys' attitudes and their parents' perceived child-rearing patterns. ........... 35 2. Relationships between girls' attitudes and their parents' perceived child-rearing patterns ............ 35 vi INTRODUCTION The purpose of this study was to investigate the possible relationships between attitudes of adolescents toward self, peers and parents, and their perceptions of parents' child— rearing practices. Previous studies involving adolescents' self-attitudes, their attitudes toward peers and parents, and parent-child interactions will be reviewed. Then, data gathered from a Sentence Completion Test and Parent-Child Relations Question- naires will be analyzed; and will include a reliability study of the sentence completion test performance and scoring. An analysis of the correlations found between adolescent attitudes toward self and others and their perceived parents' child- rearing patterns will also be made. According to Yarrow(l960, p 646), "the concept of attitude is formulated in terms of readiness to act." He stated that attitude generally refers to "an individualis orientation toward aspects of his personal and impersonal environment and toward himself"(p 646). This present study is interested in attitude as the "interpersonal" or "social" aspects rather than impersonal aspects, since attitude toward persons might be developed in the interpersonal situation, which would form the basis for the interaction process between persons. 2 The meaning of the term self-attitude, attitude directed toward self, might be clarified by a definition of an individual's self-esteem. Many studies emphasize self-esteem as a basis of integrated personality and self-concept. For instances, Gorlow, Butler & Gutherie (1963) viewed self— attitude as "a major determinant of the behavior and perceptions", and Douvan and Gold(l966) indicated that self-esteem is "the total configuration of self". It is stated that "self-esteem is a personal judgment of worthiness that is expressed in the attitudes the individual holds toward himself"(Coopersmith,l 1967, p 5). In that context, the individual makes the evaluation regarding himself according to his abilities and personal values as he is aware of them. However, these self—attitudes may be "conscious or unconscious", and are responded favorably or unfavorably, according to Coopersmith(l967). Authors have emphasized that to have a well-balanced self- attitude is a critical aspect for establishing acceptable attitudes toward others, and vice versa. According to Douvan and Gold(l966), self—esteem is developed through interpersonal adjustments, and this is particularly found in adolescent girls. McMahon(l965) also stated that acceptable self-attitudes depend on good interactions with others. It is a generalized assumption that parents and peers are the most important interpersonal variables for children in the development of self-esteem and desirable interactions. Therefore, children's attitudes toward peers and parents should be investigated as an important area of research, too. 3 Douvan and Gold(l966) indicated that an individual's self-esteem is affected by peers' evaluation directed to him and parents' influences on him. In a similar context: Rosenberg(l963) indicated that an adolescent's self-conception was associated with others' interests in his views. As another factor found to be related to self-esteem, a study according to Coopersmith(l959) was degree of success. In that study, it was found that high self-esteem was highly related to the extent of individual's successful experiences. Douvan and Gold (1966) introduced also Rosenberg's(l965) findings that when an adolescent perceived his parents as positively concerned about him, he tended to have higher self-esteem, and that adolescents showed lowered self—esteem when there were maladjusted relation- ships with friends. V Medinnus(l965) found that adolescents who were high in self—acceptance and adjustment perceived their parents as more accepting of them than do adolescents with low self-acceptance. In addition, Medinnus(l965) found that adolescents high in self- acceptance identify more closely with their mothers' than their fathers' child-rearing practices. According to Nikelly(l967), maladjustment in adolescents resulted from the mothers who were neglectful of their children. The fact that parental loving attitude is positively related to high self-esteem was found in another study by Rosenberg(l963). Rosenberg found that parental interest in children("parents' knowing of the child's friends", "the parents' responses to the child's performance in school", and "family 4 interactions during mealtime" were employed as indicators of parental interest in the child.) was associated with high self- esteem for adolescents, while parental "extreme indifference" was associated with adolescents' low self-esteem. A long-term study of attitudes toward self is reported by Coopersmith(l967). He studied the self-esteem of normal middle— class boys in pre-adolescence. He concentrated on the effect of parental treatment and concluded that persons who were reared with "acceptance", "respect", and "clearly defined rules" were competent and independent individuals with positive selfeesteem: and that persons reared under a condition of rejection had negative self-esteem, yielding tendency to withdraw and sub- missiveness. The above studies show that an individual's self-attitude is related to peers' evaluations or interests in him, parental behaviors directed toward him, and degree of success on his. doings. This might imply that adolescents' attitudes toward self and others' influences—especially parental influences-are highly related. Harris and Tseng(1957) studies children's attitudes toward peers and parents, using a sentence completion technique. He indicated that adolescents tend to have increased interest in the peer group and to have decreased interest in the parent figures. In that study, he found that attitudes toward peers were favorable, especially toward members of their own sex, and attitudes toward mothers were more favorable than toward fathers for both sexes. S Livson(l966) explored the relationships between three aspects of parents' behavior(authority, affection, and emotional investment) and their children's involvement with each parent. The aspects of parental behaviors were based upon clinical evaluations of yearly interviews with the mother. Livson found that the children were highly involved with mothers who were highly affectionate toward them. Douvan and Gold(l966) indicate that dependent and/or rebellious adolescents, who had parents who expect their children to obey and respect their authority, showed hostility toward the parents on projective tests. An early study by Watson(1934) introduced in his later study(l957) reported that adolescents with strict parents had unfavorable interactions with peers and hostility to their parents. The above studies suggest that children have favorable attitudes toward others when their parents practice loving techniques, while they have unfavorable attitude toward others when the parents are restrictive and hostile. It is suggested that parental symbolic—reward by praise and love may be effective to increase their sons' positive self- esteem (Bandura and Walters, 1960) and that physical punishment used by parents may decrease the child's positive self-esteem (Sears, Maccoby, and Levin, 1957). It is stated that the parents' high use of physical punishment for children's agression to parents, peers, and siblings rather increased their aggression (Sears, Maccoby, and Levin, 1957). Bandura and Walters(l960) found that adolexcent boys who had a great deal 6 of physical punishment from their parents tended to be hostile toward others, especially toward their teachers, and tended to dislike their parents. In addition, it is suggested that adolescents boys who were praised as a reward had warm relationship with their parents(Bandura and Walters, 1960). Therefore, it may be inferred that parental symbolic-love reward appears to be related to children's favorable attitudes toward self and others, while parental direct-object punishment appears to be related to children's unfavorable attitudes toward self and others. In the studies regarding parents' child-rearing behaviors toward their children, most data has been obtained by question- naires to parents, interviews with parents, and by observations of parental behavior(e.g., Sears, Maccoby, 8 Levin, 1957; Coopersmith, 1967; Livson, 1966). However, importance of the child's perception of his parents has been recognized early for understanding his personality development(Ausube1, et al., 1954). Parents' behaviors "effect the child's ego development only to the extent and in the form in which he perceives it" (Ausubel, et al., 1954, p 173). Therefore, it seems that the research should focus on children's perceptions on child-rearing attitudes in parents rather than on parental reports alone. Furthermore, studies(e.g., Sears, et al., 1957; Livson, 1966) regarding parental behavior which was obtained by parental reports have emphasized maternal rearing pattern, while father's role has been neglected. However, it seems that father's child- rearing techniques as well as mother's child-rearing techniques Should be considered in studies on parental behavior. 7 In a study which evaluates the Bronfenbrenner Parent Behavior Questionnaire, Siegelman(1956) emphasized using a research technique for measuring children's perceptions of how they are treated by their father and mother. Therefore, it seems to be reasonable to assume that a scale which measures a child's perceptions of child-rearing patterns of both parents would be more complete than a scale which uses parental reports of either the mother or the father. That is why Roe- Siegelman's Parent-Child Relations Questionnaire (Roe and Siegelman, 1963) was used to measure parents' behaviors in the present study. The questionnaire is described in the section of Method of this writing. Parental child-rearing variables used in this study are defined as follows, according to descriptions of Parent-Child Relation Variables in Appendix I: (a)"Loving" practice refers to giving the child warm care and attention, encouraging independence, and giving the child more opportunity for good interactions with his friends, in the context of well—defined limits; (b)"Rejecting" practice refers to being cold and hostile, tendency to reject the child as an individual, and using high punitiveness and strict regulations; (c)"Symbolic-1ove reward" refers to praise for approved behavior and reward by giving affection; and (d)"Direct—object punishment" refers to physical punishment and withdrawing important things for the child. In view of the previous research, it might be hypothesized that: 1) Adolescents' favorable self-attitudes would be associated with perceived loving child-rearing practices by the parents. 8 2) Adolescents' unfavorable self-attitudes would be associated with perceived rejecting child-rearing practices by parents. 3) Adolescents' favorable self-attitudes would be associated with perceived symbolic-love reward given by their parents. 4) Adolescents' unfavorable self-attitudes would be associated with perceived direct-object punishment given by their parents. 5) Favorable attitudes toward peers in adolescents would be associated with perceived loving techniques of parents. 6) Unfavorable attitudes toward peers in adolescents would be associated with perceived rejecting treatment of parents. 7) Favorable attitudes toward peers in adolescents would be associated with perceived symbolic-love reward given by parents. 8) Unfavorable attitudes toward peers in adolescents would be associated with perceived direct-object punishment used by parents. 9) Favorable attitudes toward parents in adolescents would be associated with perceived loving techniques and symbolic-love reward used by parents. 10) Unfavorable attitudes toward parents in adolescents would be associated with perceived rejecting techniques and direct—object punishment used by parents. To put those simply, it might be hypothesized that: (a) Adolescents' favorable attitudes toward self, peers, fathers, and mothers would be associated with perceived parental loving techniques and symbolic-love reward; (b) Adolescents' unfavorable attitudes toward self, peers, fathers, and mothers would be associated with perceived parental rejecting techniques and direct-object punishment. METHOD Subjects The subjects used in this study were 39 boys and 45 girls enrolled in grade 12th and 13th of St. Joseph's High School in Ottawa, Canada during 1968. The subjects participated in both sessions of testing. The mean age of the Ss was 17 years, and they resided in middle class of socio-economic status according to their parents' estimated income and occupations. All Ss had lived with both parents, and approximately one third of the Ss had working mothers. No differences seemed to exist between the boys and the girls on the age, socio-economic status, and having working mothers. Materials (a) Sentence Completion Test To measure self-attitudes, and attitudes toward peers and parents, a Sentence Completion Test was devised. Since the sentence completion test is a kind of projective technique, it allows an individual to respond freely to the stimulus as he wants(Rotter, 1951; Henry, 1960). An individual's feelings, attitudes, and other reactions to people etc. are frequently measured by the test, since one advantage of the instrument is that each researcher can design the scale to investigate attitudes in various contexts(Henry, 1960). Twenty-five incomplete sentences, which seem to reveal attitudes freely, were selected from sentences developed by Wilson(l949), from the Rotter Incomplete Sentence Blank(Rotter 9 10 and Rafferty, 1950), and from sentences used by other invest- igators. To measure Ss' self-attitudes, the following ten incomplete sentences were employed: (1) I . (6) I Like . (2) I feel . (7) When I was younger;___, (3) I can . (8) I hate (4) My mind . (9) I am very - (5) I need . (10)Sometimes I . To measure Ss' attitudes toward peers, five sentence stems were given to the Ss: (1) Most boys (2) Most girls (3) I feel that a friend (4) Children are usually certain that (5) When I am not around, my friends To measure attitudes toward fathers, the following five sentence stems were given to the Ss: (l) I feel that my father (2) My father treats me - . (3) My father and I (4) My father is more likely than my mother to (5) I think that most fathers . To measure Ss' attitudes toward their mothers, the following incomplete sentences were given to the Ss: (1) I feel that my mother (2) My mother treats me (3) My mother and I ll (4) My mother is more likely than my father to . (5) I think that most mothers This instrument appears in Appendix II. As Rotter(l951) indicated in his study, Sacks(l949) found that sentence stems stated with the first-person pronouns were more predictive to measure aspects of personality than that using proper names and third-person pronouns. Such finding was supported in a study by Hanfman and Getzel(1953), who demon- strated the fact that the first-person format tended to encourage responses related to more being aware of self-attitudes. Depending on the advantage, sentence stems stated with the first- person pronouns instead of those using third-person pronouns were used in the present study. Sentence stems such as "the best thing about me ", "the easiest way to get along with friends ", and "the EQEEE thing about my parents " were avoided so that Ss would not be biased in revealing their feelings by the sentence stem itself. (b) Parent-Child Relations Questionnaire (PCR Questionnaire) The PCR Questionnaire was used to measure the character- istic behaviors of parents when they are interacting with their children. The questionnaire was devised by Roe and Siegelman (1963) to obtain behaviors of fathers and of mothers toward their children, as perceived by the children. There are ten subtests: six containing 15 items each for Loving, Protecting, Demanding, Rejecting, Neglecting, and Casual, and four with 10 items each for Symbolic-love Reward, Direct- Object Reward, Symbolic-love Punishment, and Direct-object 12 Punishment. Descriptions of the variables appear in Appendix I. The PCR Questionnaire consisted of 130 items about fathers and except for 11 items, the same questions about mothers. The questionnaire is presented in Appendix III. Procedures (a) Administration of tests At the first session, the sentence completion tests and Parent-Child Relations Questionnaire were administered to the Ss as a group without any time limit. The following instructions for the sentence completion test, which was based upon the instructions used by Sears and Sherman(l964, p 36) were given to the subjects: "This is a test of how you think and feel. Complete each of the following sentences so that it makes the best sense possible. In most cases, the best way to answer the test is to write down the first idea that comes to your mind. Do not skip any sentences." Approximately 20 minutes were employed to complete the test. For the PCR questionnaire, Ss received the following instructions: "In this folder there are a number of statements which describe ways that father(mothers)act toward their children. Read each statement carefully and think how well it describes your father(mother) while you were growing up. Before each statement there are four lines labelled VERY TRUE; TENDED to be TRUE; TENDED to be UNTRUE; VERY UNTRUE. Put an X on the line that indicates how true you think each statement 13 was of your father(mother). If none of these descriptions seem quite right, you may put the X between two of the lines." For example, if the subject remembered that his father(mother) gave him everything he wanted, he should mark the item as follows: Very Tended Tended Very My father True to be to be Untrue True Untrue Tried to get me every- X thing I wanted Ss were allowed to mark X between any two of the lines when none of those four labels seemed quite appropriate to answer the item. Only four variables (Loving, Rejecting, Symbolic—love Reward, and Direct-object Punishment) were actually used in the analysis of the present study, since hypothesis for the four variables could be established on the basis of previous studies involving the relationships between adolescents' attitudes and parental behaviors. However, all 10 subtests were given to the Ss, because of the test material format. After finishing 130 items (10 subtests) about either one of the parents, Ss answered 130 items about the other parent. The instructions were the same for both parents., Approximately 30-40 minutes were employed to complete the questionnaires. A retest of the sentence completion test was administered after a week interval. The same sentence completion test was administered to the same group with the same instructions. The purpose of the retest was to measure the reliability of the sentence completion test. Before proceeding further, those subjects who did not 14 live with both parents, who did not completely answer the tests, or who did not participate in both sessions of the tests were excluded from this study. Therefore, from the group of 137 for both sexes, 39 boys and 45 girls were used as subjects in this study. (b) Scoring For the attitude scores, each sentence completed by Ss was scored by evaluating the test in terms of positive: negative, or neutral affect of the response. Favorable attitudes were scored as positive 0+), negative scores (—) suggested unfavorable attitudes, and responses which did not belong to either favorable or unfavorable attitudes were scored as neutral (0). Examples of such affects are shown below. Examples of Favorable attitudes: I am a confident_young girl. Most boys are nice. I feel that my father is a great man. My mother and I are very close. Unfavorable attitudes: My mind is confused. Most girls are catty. My father treats me like a little kid. I feel that my mother is easilyinervous. Neutral attitudes: I need a newgpen. When I am not around, my friends go home. 15 My father and I watched TV last night. My mother is more likely than my father to fix the supper. A total number of negative scores was subtracted from a total number of positive scores, for each of attitude scales; attitudes toward self, peers, fathers and mothers, then ten was added to each score of the scales in order to exclude minuses. The total score was the sum of scores on the four scales. The first administration of attitude scales were scored by two judges, a psychologist and this writer; then inter- judge reliability coefficients were calculated. For data analysis, scores obtained on the first test administration were used. Retests of attitude scales were scored by this writer; then test-retest reliability was obtained. The results of inter-judge reliability and test-retest reliability will be mentioned on the next section. In order to avoid bias, the scoring used in the present study was done "blind". The 84 subjects' completions on the first item were scored; then the second completions were scored; and so on for all 25 sentence completions of 84 subjects. Already scored sentence completions were covered by a piece of paper during the scoring. Each item of the PCR questionnaires was scored as follows, according to the standard scoring procedure developed by Roe and Siegelman(l963). Very Tended Tended Very True to be to be Untrue True Untrue a b c d e f :33" i: ' 3"” WW 16 If the subject marked the X on any place of the range from "a" to "b" in an item, his score of the item would be "5". An X marked on the range from "b" to "c" was scored "4". An X marked on the range from "c" to "d" was scored "3". An X marked on the range from "d" to "e" was scored "2". An X marked on the range from "e" to "f" was scored "1". A subject's total score for each variab1e(i.e., Loving, etc.) resulted from the adding all scores of the items which belong to each variable. A scoring sheet attached in Appendix III. The above scoring followed the standard scoring system used by the authors (Roe and Siegelman) of the questionnaire, on which the validation of the test was based. However, the five-point scale does not seem to be reasonable, since it is difficult to decide whether a response marked between two lines labeled "Very True" and "Tended to be True" is actually belong to "Very True" or ”Tended to be True", for example. It is suggested that 7-point scale as the following would be reasonable. Very Tended Tended Very True to be to be Untrue True Untrue MW (e) Analysis of data In order to obtain reliability data on the attitude scales, inter-judge correlation and test—retest correlation were calculated. Pearson product moment correlation was used. The correlational analyses were also carried out to test 17 the hypotheses concerning the relationship between attitudes in adolescents and their parents' perceived child-rearing patterns. For each subject, there are 13 scores; 5 attitude scores(toward self, peers, fathers, mothers, and total), 4 scores from PCR Questionnaire about the father (Loving, Rejecting, Symbolic-love reward, and Direct—object punishment), and 4 scores from PCR Questionnaire about the mother (same variables as fathers). Each of the 4 perceived child-rearing patterns in fathers was correlated with each of the 5 attitude scores and each of the 4 perceived child-rearing patterns of mothers was also correlated with each of the 5 attitude scores in adolescents. Sex of the subject was considered separately in this correlation. RESULTS (a) Reliabilities of Sentence Completion Test Inter—scorer reliability coefficients for Ss' attitude scores are presented in Table 1. The correlations between the judges for scores in attitudes toward self, peers, fathers, Table l Inter-Judge Reliability Coefficients for Ss' attitude scores Attitudes Toward self .9106 * Toward peers .9169 * Toward fathers .8601 * Toward mothers .9626 * Total .9221 * '3" p ( .0005 and mothers ranged from .86 to .96; and the correlation of two scorers on total attitude scores was .92. These coefficients are all Significant (p (.0005) and reach a level comparable to those used in other studies (e.g., Harris and Tseng, 1957). Therefore, reliability found was sufficient for the present study. Means and standard deviations of all Ss' attitude scores on both the first test scored by two judges and retest appear in Appendix IV. 18 19 Table 2 Test—Retest Reliability Coefficients for Ss' attitude scores Attitudes Toward self .6809 * Toward peers .5278 * Toward fathers .7639 * Toward mothers .4911 * Total .7517 * * p < .0005 Table 2 shows test-retest reliability coefficients for Ss' attitude scores. All correlation coefficients (.49negative association3e—————9positive association) FATHERS' GIRLS' MOTHERS' Child-rearing Attitudes Child-rearing Practices toward Practices REJECTING SELF 1[ REJECTING \ \ / 7 \ / / LOVING \ PEERS LOVING \\ \ M SYMBOLIC-LOVE M SYMBOLIC-LOVE REWARD FATHERS l REWARD DIRECT-OBJECT MOTHERS ” DIRECT-OBJECT PUNISHMENT f————-—9 PUNISHMENT Figure 2 Relationships between Girls' Attitudes and their Parents' perceived child-rearing patterns ((———4:negative association;4———a'possitive association) 36 mothers (Figure l); (f) adolescent boys' favorable attitudes toward their fathers are associated with symbolic-love reward given by fathers rather than by mothers (Figure 1); (g) un- favorable attitudes toward mothers are associated with rejecting treatment of mothers rather than those of fathers, for both boys and girls (Figure l and 2); (h) favorable attitudes toward mothers are related to mothers' loving, not to fathers' loving techniques, for girls (Figure 2); (i) favorable attitudes toward mothers are associated with direct-object punishment used by fathers rather than by mothers, for girls (Figure 2). As Becker (1964) indicated that different consequences of parent-child relations in studies concerning with sexes of parent and child would result from "differences in the agent, level, and mode of treatment for boys and girls", different interaction pairs in the findings of this study might depend upon such factors as different ways of perceptions, different rearing techniques, the agent of practicing the techniques (sex of parent), and character of the perceiver or sex of the child. Such factors are assumed to create complex associations. As it has been discussed, parents were viewed favorably by their sons and daughters when they were perceived as using (Desirable techniques, while parents were viewed unfavorably *whenithey were perceived as using undesirable techniques. It Inight emphasize that attitude would be a primary component of :interpersonal interactions. It should be noticed that patterns (If child-rearing practices in parents were derived from {Marceptions of the adolescents. Therefore, it may be assumed tlurt adolescents perceive desirably the ways of their parents' 37 behaviors toward them, since they have favorable attitudes toward the parents; or vice versa the adolescents have favorable attitudes toward the parents, since they perceive their parents as using desirable techniques. In the same context, it would be the same in the relationship between un- desirable techniques in parents and unfavorable attitudes in adolescents. As a matter of fact, it is difficult to see whether the parents' rearing patterns to adolescents' attitudes are "antecedents", "consequences", or "correlates", as pointed out by Coopersmith(l967). Such conditions could be "antecedents": "consequences", or "correlates", depending on factors beyond the scope of this study. The results of this study suggest that the more loving techniques parents use, the more favorable attitudes toward persons adolescents show; and that the more punitive and reject- ing parents are, the more unfavorable attitudes the adolescents show. Therefore, it seems that it is necessary for parents to concentrate on loving rearing practices so that the adolescent sons and daughters have favorable and desirable interactions. There seems to be few studies which investigated adolescents' attitudes toward persons in a connection with parental behavior towards them, which makes difficult to compare with this study. The results on self-attitudes of this study are not consistent with other studies involving self—attitudes. Most of other studies show that parents' acceptance and loving care are related to high self-esteem or favorable self-attitude, while parents' rejection is associated with low self-esteem (e.g., Coopersmith, 38 1967; Medinnus, 1965). In the present study, only boys' self—attitudes were found to be negatively associated with fathers' rejecting practices. Other correlations were not significant. Probably the fact that subjects used in this study were in different culture from other samples might be a reason of the inconsistent results. Another possible reason of inconsistent result might be different instruments measuring parents' child-rearing behavior. For instance, Coopersmith (1967) and Livson (1966) obtained parents' behaviors by inter- views with and questionnaire to parents. 'In the present study, parental rearing behaviors were obtained by adolescents' perception of parents. ‘Regarding attitudes toward others, Harris and Tseng (1957) investigated attitudes toward peers and parents in children, but parental discipline was not investigated. It is generally recognized that among personal environments to a child, siblings of the child also play as important personal role in his development. Interacting with siblings in a family, the child may develop certain attitudes toward the siblings. Therefore, it might be valuable to investigate attitudes toward siblings, too. Furthermore, it would be useful to explore the relationship between attitudes toward self and others and parental child-rearing patterns according to developmental stages of children. Harris and Tseng (1957) conclude that boys' unfavorable attitudes toward parents decrease and girls' unfavorable attitudes tend to increase as they grow older. Then, cross—cultural study of the relation- ship would be considerable under an assumption that the attitudes would be differently related to parents' child-rearing techniques 39 in different culture. It seems to me that more explicit and precise studies on interpersonal attitudes should be explored because knowledge about preferable attitudes seem to be necessary to have desirable interactions. On sentence completion test used in this study, high reliabilities were obtained, thus encouraging its use for the future study. However, it is suggested that certain modifi- cations in sentence stems may help to obtain more explicit and conscious responses in attitudes. Most of disagreements between scorers appeared in such items as "I need___F, "I hate___", and "When I was younger___?. The sentence stem, "I hate___" itself seemed to affect to induce negative responses, even though positive response like "I hate nothing" might be expected. On the contrary, the stem, "I like___" tended to induce mostly positive responses. It would be less complicated for scoring to exclude such sentence stems as "I need___", "I hate___F, and "I like___", as long as more preciSe rules for the scoring are not necessary. In order to obtain more valid responses which are proper for measurement of attitudes, some of sentence stems may be modified as follows: When I was younger___. to: Comparing with when I was younger, I now;__. I feel that a friend___. to: I feel that my friends___. Children are usually certain that . 40 to: My friends are usually certain that___ I think that most fathers___. to: Comparing with other fathers, my father___. I think that most mothers___. to: Comparing with other mothers, my mother . Unrelating to hypotheses of the present study, some significant correlations emerged from the relationships between adolescents' attitudes and total patterns of parents' child- rearing practices. The correlations are presented in Tables of Appendix VII. The questions whether adolescents attitudes are more favorably related or more unfavorably related to parents and whether the attitudes are related more to fathers or to mothers should be answered through another kind of statistical analysis which was not used in the present study. However, different relationships found between adolescents' attitudes and one parents' perceived rearing patterns from those between adolescents' attitudes and the other parents' rearing practices .appear to suggest that affects of father-child relation and rnother-child relation to adolescents' attitudes may be different. Table A6 in Appendix VII provides correlations between looys' attitudes and perceived fathers' behaviors. More ruegative associations over positive ones might indicate that attitudes in boys would be related more unfavorably to their fathers' rearing techniques. Table A7 in Appendix VII shows (Harrelations between boys' attitudes and perceived maternal :rearing patterns. The more negative associations over positive 41 ones might indicate that boys' attitudes would be more unfavorably than favorably related to their mothers' rearing patterns. From both Table A6 and Table A7, it might be inferred that attitudes of the boys would be more unfavorably related to both parents' perceived rearing patterns. Furthermore, it might be that attitudes in boys, especially attitudes toward fathers and peers, would be related to fathers' than to mothers' rearing patterns. Table A8 in Appendix VII presents relationships of attitudes in girls to perceived fathers' rearing techniques. Relatively more positive associations might indicate that attitudes in girls would be more favorably related to their fathers' rearing patterns. Table A9 in Appendix VII provides correlations between attitudes in girls and rearing techniques in mothers. Relatively more negative associations might indicate that attitudes in girls would be more unfavorably related to their mothers' rearing patterns. From both Table A8 and Table A9, it might be inferred that attitudes in girls seem to be almost equally related to both parents. Particularly, girls' attitudes toward their fathers seem to be related more to fathers' rearing techniques; but girls' attitudes toward their mothers are related more to mothers' rearing techniques. On the basis of the results in the four tables, it may be inferred that unfavorable attitudes in adolescents tend to relate to same-sexed parents, that is, unfavorable attitudes are related more to fathers for boys and more to mothers for 42 girls. It also may be inferred that relationship of fathers' rearing practices to their sons and daughters seems to be great. (Clausen (1966) indicated that fathers' participations in child-rearing were increased with a decreaSe in authority, comparing with the past generation. Becker (1964) also pointed out that "where both mothers and fathers have been studied, most of research has shown the fathers' influence on the childs behavior to be at least equal to that of the mother", and that "such findings should help to reinforce the growing trend toward inclusions on the father in treatment efforts" (p 204). Inference made from this study might show that the effect of father-perception would be more significant to adolescents' attitudes than that of mother-perception, especially for boys. Such tendency may illustrate that fathers' influences tend to become just as important to adolescents as those of mothers in this study. Certainly, some inferences made from correlations found are merely tentative; therefore, it would be necessary to conform those inferences in a future study. SUMMARY This study demonstrated some correlates between attitudes of self and others in adolescent boys and girls and behaviors of fathers and of mothers toward their children, as perceived by the adolescents. Forty-five girls and thirty-nine boys in a high school were employed as subjects. In order to infer adolescents' attitudes, a sentence completion test was administered to the subjects in two sessions, and Roe-Siegelman's Parent—Child Relations Questionnaire was tested to measure parents' child— rearing techniques. It was hypothesized that (a) adolescents' favorable attitudes toward self, peers, and parents would be associated with perceived loving techniques and symbolic-love reward; (b) adolescents' unfavorable attitudes toward self, peers, and parents would be associated with perceived parents' rejecting techniques and direct—object punishment. To obtain reliability of the sentence completion test: interfiudge correlation and test-retest correlation were carried out, and those reliabilities are found to be sufficiently high. The results obtained from relationships between attitudes toward self and others in adolescents and some patterns of perceived parental rearing techniques led to the following 43 44 conclusions: 1) Unfavorable self—attitudes in boys are related to rejecting treatment used by fathers. 2) Favorable attitudes toward peers are related to maternal loving techniques and unfavorable attitudes toward peers are related to fathers' direct-object punishment, for boys. 3) Maternal rejecting patterns are associated with adolescents' unfavorable attitudes not only toward the mothers, but also toward fathers, for girls. 4) Fathers' rejecting patterns are associated with unfavorable attitudes toward the fathers, for boys. 5) Direct—object punishment given by both parents are associated with boys' unfavorable attitudes, especially toward fathers. V 6) Direct-object punishment given by fathers are associated with favorable attitudes toward mothers, for girls. 7) Loving treatment used by only fathers are associated with favorable attitudes toward the fathers in both boys and girls; and that used by only mothers are associated with favorable attitudes toward mothers in girls. 8) Symbolic-love reward given by both parents for girls and that given by only fathers for boys are associated with favorable attitudes toward fathers. 9) As a whole, adolescent boys' interpersonal attitudes are negatively related to both parents' rejecting techniques and direct—object punishment. 10) As a whole, adolescent girls' interpersonal attitudes are positively related to both parents' loving techniques and negatively related to mothers' rejecting patterns. 45 To put the results generally, favorable attitudes toward self and others are significantly associated with both parents' perceived loving techniques, for girls. Then, unfavorable attitudes toward self and others are significantly associated with mothers' perceived rejecting patterns for girls, and with both parents' perceived rejecting patterns and direct-object punishment for boys. LIST OF REFERENCES LIST OF REFERENCES Ausubel, D.P., Balthazer, E.E., Rosenthal, I., Blackman, L.S., Schpoont, S.H., Welkowitz: J. Perceived parent attitudes as determinants of children's ego structure. Child Development, 1954, 25, 173—184. Bandura, A. 8 Walters, R.H. Adolescent aggression. New York: Ronald Press, 1960. Becker, W.C. Consequences of different kinds of parental discipline. In Hoffman, M.L. 8 Hoffman, L.W.(Eds.), Review of child development research. Vol. I, New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1964. C1ausen, J.A. Family structure, socialization, and personality. In Hoffman, L.W. O Hoffman, M.L. (Eds.), Review of child development research. Vol. II, New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1966. Coopersmith, S. A method for determining types of self—esteem. J. of Abnorm. 8 Soc. Psychol., 1959, 59, 87-94. Coopersmith, S. The antecedents of self-esteem. San Francisco: W.H. Freeman 8 Co., 1967. Douvan, E. 8 Gold, M. Modal patterns in American adolescence. In Hoffman, L.W. & Hoffman, M.L. (Eds.), Review of child develppment research. Vol. II, New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1966. Engel, M. The stability of the self- -concept in adolescent. J. of Abnorm. G Soc. P§ychol., 1959, 58, 211—215. Forrest, T. Parental roots of male character development. Psyphoanalytic Review, 1967, 54(1), 51- 68. Gorlow, L., Butler, A., Butler, A., O Gutherie, G. Correlates of self—attitudes of retardates. American J. of Ment. Defic., 1963: 67: 549-554. Hanfmann, E. 8 Getzels, J.W. Studies of the sentence completion tests. J. Proj. Tech., 1953: 17, 280-294. Harris, D.B. 8 Tseng, S.C. Children's attitudes toward peers and parents as revealed by sentence completion. Child Development, 1957, 28, 401-411. 46 47 Henry, W.E. Projective techniques. In Mussen, P.H. (Ed.) Handbook of research methods in child development. New York: John Wiley 8 Sons, Inc., 1960. Hoffman, L.W. O Lippitt, R. The measurement of family life variables. In Mussen, P.H. (Ed.), Handbook of research methods in child development. New York: John Wiley 8 Sons, Inc., 1960. Horowitz, E.L. O Horowitz, R.E. Development of social attitudes in children. Sociometry, 1938, 1, 301-338. Jones, M.C. 8 Mussen, P.H. Self-conceptions, motivations, and interpersonal attitudes of early- and late-maturing girls. Child Development, 1958, 29, 491-501. Kagan, J. The child's perception of the parent. J. of Abnorm. 8 Soc. Psychol., 1956, 53: 257-258- Katz, D. The functional approach to the study of attitudes. In Fishbein, M. (Ed.) Readings in attitude theory and measurement. New York: John Wiley 8 Sons, Inc., 1967. Livson, N. Parental behavior and children's involvement with their parents. J. of Genetic Psychol., 1966, 109(2), 173-194. McMahon, W.J. et. al. (eds.) It's your pprsonality. 2nd Ed., New York: Harcourt, B race 8 World, Inc., 1965, Pp 162-172. Medinnus, C.R. Adolescents' self-acceptance and perceptions of their parents, J. of Consulting Psyphol., 1965, 29(2), 150—154. Mussen, P.H. 8 Jones, M.C. Self—conceptions, motivations, and interpersonal attitudes of late- and early-maturing boys. Child Development, 1957, 28, 243-256. Nikelly, A.G. Maternal indulgence and neglect and maladjustment in adolescents. J. of Clinical Psychol., 1967, 23(2), 148-150. Proshansky, H.M. The development of intergroup attitudes. In Hoffman, L. 8 Hoffman, M. (Eds.), Review of child development research, Vol. II, New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1966. Roe, A. 8 Siegelman, M. A parent-child relations questionnaire. Child Development, 1963: 34: 355-369- Rogers, C.R. The significance of the self—regarding attitudes and perceptions. In Gorlow, L. 8 Katkovsky, W. (Eds.), Readings in the psychology of adjpstment. New York: McGraw— Hill Book Co., Inc., 1959. Rosenberg, M. Parental interest and children's self—conceptions. Sociometrx: 1963, 25(1): 35—49. 48 Rosenberg, M. Society and adolescent self-imagg. Princeton: N.J.: Princeton Univ. Press, 1965. Rotter, J.B. Word association and sentence completion methods. In Anderson, H.H. 8 Anderson: G.L. An introduction to projective techniques. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice- H3113 Inc., 1951. Rotter, J.B. O Rafferty, J.B. Manual: The Rotter Incomplete Sentences Blank. New York: The Psychological Corp., 1950. Sacks, J.M. Effect upon projective responses of stimuli referring to the subject and to others. J. of Consult. Sears, R.R., Maccoby, E.E., 8 Levin, H. Patterns of child rearing. Evanston, 111.: Row, Peterson, 1957. Sears, P.S. 8 Sherman, V.S. In pursuit of self-esteem: Case studies of eight elementapy school children. Belmont, Calif.: Wadsworth Publishing Co., 1964. Shoben: E.J. Jr. Toward a concept of the normal personality. In Gorlow, L. 8 Katkovsky, W. (Eds.), Readinggfiin the psychology of adjpstments. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., Inc., 1959. Siegelman, M. Evaluation of Bronfenbrenner's questionnaire for children concerning parental behavior. Child Development, 1965, 36, 163-174. Smith, N. Psychology and child discipline. Child and Family, 1967, 6(1), 29-41. Snyder, R.T. Personality adjustment, self-attitudes, and anxiety differences in retarded adolescents. Amer. J. Ment. DBfiC.’ 1966, 71) 33—41. Watson, G. Some personality differences in children related to strict or permissive parental discipline. J. of Psychol., 1957: 44: 227-249. Watson, G.A comparison of the effects of lax versus strict home training. J. of Soc. Psychol., 1934, 5, 102-105. Wilson: I. The use of a sentence completion and maladjusted secondary school pupils. J. of Consult. Psychol., 1949 13: 400-403- Yarrow, M.R. The measurement of children's attitudes and values. In Mussen, P.H. (Ed.) Handbook of research methods in child development. New York: John Wiley 8 Sons, Inc., 1960. APPENDICES APPENDIX I Description of Parent-Child Relations Variables (Roe O Siegelman, 1963, p.357) ErotectiVEL-This category includes parents who give the child's interests first priority. They are very indulgent, provide special privileges, are demonstratively affectionate, may be gushing. They select friends carefully, but will rarely let him visit other homes without them. They protect him from other children, from experiences in which he may suffer disappointment or discomfort or injury. They are highly intrusive and expect to know all about what he is thinking and experiencing. They reward dependency. Eemanding}— Parents in this group set up high standards of accomplishment in particular areas, manners, school, etc.. They impose strict regulations and demand unquestioning obedience to them, and they do not make exceptions. They (expect the child to be busy at all times at some useful activity. They have high punitiveness. They restrict friendships in accord with these standards. They do not try to find out what a child is thinking or feeling, they tell him what to think or feel. IRejectingF—Parents in this group follow the extremer patterns of the preceding group, but this becomes rejecting 49 50 when their attitude is a rejection of the childishness of the child. They may also reject him as an individual. They are cold and hostile, derogate him and make fun of him and his inadequacies and problems. They may frequently leave him alone and often will not permit other children in the house. They have no regard for the child's point of view. The regulations they establish are not for the sake of training the child, but for protecting the parent from his intrusions. (NeglectingF-These parents pay little attention to the child, giving him a minimum of physical care and no affection. They forget promises made to him, forget things for him. They are cold, but are not derogatory nor hostile. They leave him alone, but do not go out of their way to avoid him. --These parents pay more attention to the child and are midly affectionate when they do. They will be responsive to him if they are not busy about something else. They do not think about him or plan for him very much, but take him as a part of the general situation. They don't worry much about him and make little definite effort to train him. They are easygoing, have few rules, and do not make much effort to enforce those they have. -—These parents give the child warm and loving attention. They try to help him with projects that are important to him, but they are not intrusive. They are more likely to reason with the child than to punish him, but they will punish him. They give praise, but not indiscriminatingly. They try specifically to help him through problems in the way best for him. The child feels able to confide in them and to 51 ask them for help. They invite his friends to the house and try to make things attractive for them. They encourage independence and are willing to let him take chances in order to grow towards it. Distinction between Loving and Casual categories can be difficult. A basic differentiating factor is the amount of thought given to the child's problems. (Symbolic-Love Rewardk-The parents using this kind of reward praise their children for approved behavior, give them special attention, and are affectionately demonstrative. Direct—Object RewardL-These include tangible rewards such as gifts of money or toys, special trips, or relief from chores. Symbolic—Love PunishmentL-Such punishments include shaming the child before others, isolating him, and withdrawing love. [Direct-Object Punishmenfl--These include physical punishment, taking away playthings, reducing allowance, denying promised trips, and so on. APPENDIX II SENTENCE COMPLETION TEST Please fill these blanks first (your answers are confidential). 1. NAME 2. AGE 3. SEX ( ) M or F 4. Have your parents lived together during your childhood? (Until you were about 10 years old) YES NO 5. Your father's occupation 6. Your mother‘s occupation 7. Estimated parents' income ( ) ( ) ( ) High Middle Low Directions: This is a test of how you think and feel. Complete each of the following sentences so that it makes the best sense possible. In most-cases, the best way to answer the test is to write down the first idea that comes to your mind. Do not skip any sentences. Turn to the next page. * Twenty-five incomplete sentences were selected from sentences developed by Wilson(l949), from the Rotter Incomplete Sentence Blank (Rotter and Rafferty, 1950), and from sentences used by other investigators. 52 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 53 I I feel I can My mind I need I like When I was younger I hate I am very Sometimes I Most boys Most girls I feel that a friend Children are usually certain that When I am not around, my friends I feel that my father My father treats me My father and I I think that most fathers My father is more likely than my mother to I feel that my mother My mother treats me My mother and I I think that most mothers My mother is more likely than my father to APPENDIX III PCR QUESTIONNAIRE _ FATHERS Roe—Siegelman Below are a number of statements which describe ways that fathers act toward their children. Read each statement carefully and think how well it describes your father while you were growing up. Before each statement there are four lines labelled VERY TRUE; TENDED to be: TRUE; TENDED to be UNTRUE; VERY UNTRUE. Put an X on the line that indicates how true you think each statement was of your father. If none of these descriptions seems quite right, you may put the X between two of the lines. For example, if your memory is that your father often let.you off easy when you did something wrong, you would mark 'the item as follows: TENDED TENDED VERY to be to be VERY TRUE TRUE UNTRUE UNTRUE My father X 1. never let me off easy when I did something wrong. Number Date 54 55 PCR QUESTIONNAIRE TENDED TENDED VERY to be to be VERY TRUE TRUE UNTRUE UNTRUE My father 1. tried to get me everything I wanted. 2. complained about me to others when I did not listen to him. 3. made no concessions for my age. 4. let me spend all my allowance any way I liked. 5. discussed what was good about my behavior and helped to make clear the desirable consequences of my actions. 6. punished me hard enough when I misbehaved to make sure I wouldn't do it again. 7. took away my toys or playthings when I was bad. 8. was genuinely interested in my affairs. 9. kept forgetting things he was supposed to do for me. 10. took me places (trips, shows, etc.) as a reward. ll. spoiled me. 12. made me feel ashamed or guilty when I misbehaved. 13. let me know I wasn't wanted. 14. set very few rules for me. 15. compared me favorably with other children when I did well. 16. made it clear that he was boss. VERY TRUE 56 TENDED TENDED to be TRUE to be VERY UNTRUE UNTRUE My father 17. l8. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. slapped or struck me when I was improper. made me feel wanted and needed. was too busy to answer my questions. relaxed rules and regulations as a reward. was very careful about protecting me from accidents. nagged or scolded when I was bad. thought it was my own fault if I got into trouble. gave me as much freedom as I wanted. told me how proud he was of me when I was good. never let me get away with breaking a rule. took away or reduced my allowance as a punishment. made me feel that I was important. did not care if I got into trouble. gave me new books or records as rewards. believed I should have no secrets from my parents. punished me by ignoring me. did not spend any more time with me than necessary. let me off easy when I did something wrong. VERY TRUE TENDED to be TRUE 57 TENDED to be VERY UNTRUE UNTRUE My father 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. 44. 45. 46. 47. 48. 49. 50. 51. treated me more like a grown- up when I behaved well. pushed me to excel in everything I did. wouldn't let me play with other children when I was bad. encouraged me to do things on my own. paid no attention to what I was doing in school. let me stay up longer as a reward. protected me from teasing or bullying by other children. made me feel I wasn't loved anymore if I misbehaved. did not want me to bring friends home. gave me the choice of what to do whenever it was possible. praised me before my playmates. told me how to spend my free time. spanked or whipped me as punishment. talked to me in a warm and affectionate way. did not take me into consideration in making plans. rewarded me by letting me off some of my regular chores. did not want me to play rough outdoor games for fear I might be hurt. 58 TENDED TENDED VERY to be to be VERY TRUE TRUE UNTRUE UNTRUE My father 52. shamed me before my playmates when I misbehaved. 53. disapproved of my friends. 54. expected me to take everyday disappointments. 55. expressed greater love for me when I was good. 56. punished me without any thought or hesitation when I misbehaved. 57. gave me extra chores as punishment. 58. tried to help me when I was scared or upset. 59. did not care whether I got the right kind of food. 60. gave me candy or ice cream or fixed my favorite foods for me as a reward. 61. made others give in to me. 62. frightened or threatened me when I did wrong. 63. went out of the way to hurt my feelings. 64. let me stay up as late as I liked. 65. gave me special attention as a reward. 66. demanded unquestioning respect and deference. 67. punished me by sending me out of the room or to bed. 68. did not try to tell me everything, but encouraged me to find things out for myself. VERY TRUE TENDED to be TRUE 59 TENDED to be VERY UNTRUE UNTRUE My father 69. left my care to someone else (e.g. a nurse or relative). 70. let me go to parties or play with others more than usual as a reward. 71. taught me to go for help to my parents or teacher rather than to fight. 72. told me how ashamed he was when I misbehaved. 73. ridiculed and made fun of me. 74. let me do pretty much what I wanted to do. 75. praised me when I deserved it. 76. always told me exactly how to do my work. 77. took away my books or records as punishment. 78. respected my point of view and encouraged me to express it. 79. acted as if I didn't exist. 80. rewarded me by giving me money, or increase my allowance. 81. wanted me to have at least as large an allowance as my friends. 82. compared me unfavorably with other children when I mis- haved. 83. complained about me. 84. let me work by myself. 85. made me feel proud when I did well. VERY TRUE TENDED to be TRUE 60 TENDED to be VERY UNTRUE UNTRUE My father 86. 87. 88. 89. 90. 91. 92. 93. 94. 95. 96. 97. 98. 99. 100. pushed me to do well in school. punished me by being more strict about rules and regulations. let me do things I thought were important even if it were inconvenient for him. paid no attention to me. hugged me, kissed me, petted me when I was good. tried tokeep me out of situations that might be unpleasant and embarrassing. reasoned with me and explained possible harmful consequences when I did wrong. compared me unfavorably to other children no matter what I did. did not object to my loafing or day-dreaming. praised me to others. would not let me question his reasoning. punished me for not taking me on trips, visits, etc. that I had been promised. tried to help me learn to live comfortably with myself. ignored me as long as I did not do anything to disturb him. gave me new things as a reward, such as toys. VERY TRUE TENDED to be TRUE 61 TENDED to be VERY UNTRUE UNTRUE My father 101. 102. 103. 104. 105. 106. 107. 108. 109. 110. 111. 112. 113. 114. 115. hated to refuse me anything. thought that it was bad for a child to be given affection and tenderness. did not tell me what time to be home when I went out. wanted to have complete control over my actions. was willing to discuss regulations with me, and took my point of view into consideration in making them. did not care who my friends were. worried about me when I was away. did not want me around at all when he had company. did not object when I was late for meals. taught me that he knew best and that I must accept his decisions. encouraged me to bring friends home, and tried to make things pleasant for them. left me alone when I was upset. worried a great deal about my health. expected children to mis- behave if they were not watched. was easy with me. TRUE TENDED to be TRUE 62 TENDED to be VERY UNTRUE UNTRUE My father 116. expected prompt and un- questioning obedience. 117. taught me skills I wanted to learn. 118. did not try to help me learn things. 119. wanted to know all about 120. 121. 122. 123. 124. 125. 126. 127. 128. 129. 130. my experiences. believed a child should be seen and not heard. did not bother much about enforcing rules. was full of advice about everything I did. made it easy for me to confide in him. forgot my birthday. did not want me to grow up. avoided my company. did not check up on whether I did my homework. allowed me to make only minor decisions. said nice things about me. did not care whether I had the same kind of clothes as other children. SCORING SHEET FOR PCR FATHERS(or MOTHERS) Case No. Date PUN REW’ PUN REW PRO S-L REJ CAS S—L DEM D-O LOV NEG D—O 1__ 2__ 3__ 4_ 5___ 6___ 7 8_ 9__ 10__ 11____ 12_____13____ 14____ 15____ 16____ 17____ 18____ 19____ 20____ 21____ 22_____23____ 24____ 25____ 26____ 27_____28_____29____ 30____ 31___ 32__ 33____ 34___ 35__ 36___ 37___ 38____ 39____ 40____ 41___ 42_ 43____ 44__ 45_ 46___ 47__ 48_ 49____ 50__ 51___ 52___ 53___ 54____ 55__ 56__ 57__ 58___ 59___ 60— 61____62____ 63___ 64__ 65___ 66__ 67___ 68___ 69__ 7o____ 71 72__ 73____ 74___ 75___ 76__ 77__ 78___ 79___ 80...— 81__ 82____ 83___ 84___ 85__ 86_____ 87__ 88___ 89_____ 90__ 91____ 92—— 93___ 94— 95— 96— 97___ 98___ 99____100___ 101____ 102____103____ 104____ 105____106____ 107 ____ 108____109_____ 110_____ 111___g112____ 113_____ 114____115_____ 116____ 117____118____ 119____, 120____121____ 122____. 123____124____ 125____, 126____127_____ 128____ 129____130____ PUN REW ’ PUN REw PRO S-L REJ CAS S-L DEM D-O LOV NEG D-0 APPENDIX IV Table A1 Means and Standard Deviations of all Ss' attitude scores (N284) Attitude toward Mean SD self 9.833 3.049 peers 12.286 1.873 Scorer 1 fathers 11.524 2.709 mothers 11.595 2.892 total 42.238 5.902 self 9.893 2.671 peers 12.226 1.653 Scorer 2 fathers 11.548 2.534 lst test mothers 11.500 2.839 total 45.143 5.371 self 9.929 2.507 Scorer 2 peers 12.012 1.668 retest fathers 11.964 2.257 mothers 11.905 3.984 total 45.452 5.116 64 APPENDIX V Means and Standard Deviations of male 88' attitude scores and of PCR scores (N=39) Table A2 Means and Standard Deviations of male Ss' attitude scores Attitudes toward Mean SD self 10.154 2.843 peers 12.103 1.714 fathers 10.795 2.638 mothers 11.538 3.051 total 44.538 5.977 Table A3 Means and standard deviations of male Ss' PCR scores Fathers Mothers PCR Variables Mean SD Mean SD Protective 37.179 7.092 40.846 8.812 Symbolic-love 25.358 5.508 27.717 5.951 punishment Rejecting 29.564 8.213 29.821 8.756 Casual 42.666 10.268 43.487 9.547 Symbolic-love reward 31.256 6.738 33.484 6.479 Demanding 41.794 10.753 45.051 10.467 Direct-object 23.743 6.979 22.948 8.271 punishment Loving 52.564 12.119 58.615 8.722 Neglecting 28.666 7.921 25.333 7.371 Direct-object reward 21.435 6.463 25.871 7.108 65 APPENDIX VI Means and standard deviations of female Ss' attitude scores and of PCR scores (N=45) Table A4 Means and standard deviations of female Ss' attitude scores Attitudes toward Mean SD self 9.666 2.522 peers 12.333 1.609 fathers 12.200 2.272 mothers 11.466 2.676 total 45.666 4.791 Table A5 Means and standard deviations of female 55' PCR scores PCR Variables MeaiatherSD Meafiothergn Protective 42.355 9.899 42.244 8.576 Symbolic-love 23.333 5.291 28.066 6.376 punishment Rejecting 25.622 9.048 27.933 9.907 Casual 45.422 11.836 42.577 9.750 Symbolic-love reward 32.044 6.142 32.555 7.244 Demanding 39.422 9.989 42.200 10.625 Direct-object 20.133 7.235 22.844 7-510 punishment Loving 58.911 10.409 57.977 12.678 Neglecting 26.311 8.599 25.600 9.056 Direct-object reward 24.266 7.652 25.911 8.882 66 APPENDIX VII Correlations between adolescents' attitudes and total patterns of parents' Correlations between male Ss' Table A6 child-rearing practices attitude scores and scores of their fathers' perceived child-rearing practices(N=39) Fathers' Attitudes toward CRP Self peers fathers mothers total Protective -.299 .131 -.078 -.051 —.138 Symbolic—love -.551** -.316* -.292 -.031 -.492** punishment Rejecting -.434** —.281 -.499** -.005 -.508** Casual .053 .015 .415** .139 .291 Symbolic-love .042 .150 .427** -.237 .128 reward Demanding —.270 -.390* -.402* —.034 -.444** Direct-object -.128 -.497** —.515** -.173 —.538** punishment Loving .234 .242 .377* -.065 .307 Neglecting -.277 -.296 —.3l7* .163 .261 Directeobject —.104 .122 -.070 -.338* -.215 reward * p <.05; 73* p (.01 67 Correlations between male Ss' 68 Table A7 their mothers' perceived child-rearing practices (N=39) __— t J J _—; :— attitude scores and scores of Mothers' Attitudes toward CRP self peers fathers mothers total Protective -.121 .039 -.052 —.078 -.108 Symbolic-love —.434 -.276 —.l98 -.247 -.492** punishment Rejecting -.247 —.248 _,252 _,350* -.472** Casual .031 -.030 .392* .262 .331* Symbolic-love —.083 -.039 -.126 —.127 —.173 reward Demanding -.413** -.222 -.361* -.359* -.607** Direct-object -.147 -.l69 -.356* -.286 -.439** punishment Loving .058 .346* -.045 .184 .188 Neglecting -.157 -.305 -.l34 —.150 —.289 Direct—object -.248 —.070 -.089 .093 -.125 reward 31- p<,05; *1? p<.01 69 Table A8 Correlations between female 35' attitude scores and scores of their fathers' perceived child—rearing practices(N=45) Fathers' Attitudes toward CRP self peers fathers mothers total Protective -.113 .057 .319* -.303* -.059 Symbolic-love .095 .168 -.376* .064 -.036 punishment Rejecting -.143 .118 -.596** .073 .278 Casual -.029 -.067 .111 -.281 —.141 Symbolic-love -.029 -.211 .343* -.137 -.002 reward Demanding .050 .134 -.l80 .154 .072 Direct-object -.014 .129 -.209 .329* .121 punishment Loving .109 -.008 .608** .063 .378* Neglecting —.254 .002 -,519%* -.061 -.413*% Direct-object -.26l —.l88 .367* -.062 -.061 reward * p‘<.05 ; ** p <.01 70 Table A9 Correlations between female Ss' attitude scores and scores of their mothers' perceived child-rearing practices(N=45) Mothers' Attitudes toward CRP Self peers fathers mothers total Protective -.027 .104 .469** -.264 .096 Symbolic-love -.117 .031 -.076 —.317* -.265 punishment Rejecting -.234 .019 -.331* -.4l6** -.506** Casual .098 .080 .087 .167 .213 Symbolic-love .066 -.077 .307* .082 .201 reward Demanding -.l98 —.023 -.038 -.247 -.268 Direct-object -.224 —.076 -.093 -.097 -.241 punishment Loving .201 .044 .239 .443** .481** Neglecting -.l74 .067 -.399** -.324* -.439** Direct—object -.l73 -.128 .369* .156 .128 reward * p.<,05; %% p (.01 Ml AN ST 3 12 UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES IIIIIIIII III III I 93 O3 062 2538 CHIG