I’lll

H;

'

1|

‘1

i

'

l
J

I

WWI

r
i

I
l

3&3 IIH

 

DEP'EN‘QENCY AND AGGRESSJON {N CHELDREN
AS A FUNCTEON OF
EXPRESSED WTERNAL ATTETUDES

Thesis fos- Hm Dogma of M. A.
MICHHGAN STATE UNIVERSITY

Marcia Pattersan King
1966

U “If”! fli'l I! mmmmmmmmm” A

3 1293 00669 1079

 

 

ABSTRACT

DEPENDENCY AND AGGRESSION IN CHILDREN
AS A FUNCTION OF
EXPRESSED MATERNAL ATTITUDES

By Marcia Patterson King

This study investigated the influence of mothers' reported
behavior on children's dependent, independent.and aggressive behavior.
The subjects were 40 children attending the Laboratory Preschool
at Michigan State University during fall term l965, and their mothers.
' The Sears Attitude Scale was used to measure the mothers' atti-
tudes on four dimensions: rules and restrictions, permissiveness for
dependent behavior. punitiveness for aggression toward parents, and
permissiveness for aggression toward parents. Direct observations em-
ploying predetermined categories and three-minute time sampling periods
were made to obtain measures of the children's dependent, independent,
and aggressive behavior during the nursery school period.
The main results of the study were:
l. As measured on the Sears Attitude Scale, mothers
of boys and mothers of girls were not differentially permis-
sive or restrictive for rules and regulations. punitiveness
for aggression toward parents, permissiveness for aggression
toward parents, or permissiveness for dependent behavior.
2. No significant sex differences were found in the
children's dependent, independent, and aggressive behavior

in the nursery school setting.

Marcia Patterson King

3. A negative relation was found between maternal puni-
tiveness, as measured on the attitUde scale, and observed
dependent behavior for girls. However, essentially there was
no relation between maternal punitiveness and observed depend-
ent behavior for boys.

4. Mothers who score low on permissiveness and high on
punitiveness tend to have children who score high on aggres-
sion, while mothers who score high on permissiveness and low
on punitiveness tend to have children who score low on aggres-
sion.

5. Mothers who score low on permissiveness and high on
punitiveness tend to have children who score high on depend-

ency and/or low on independence.

DEPENDENCY AND AGGRESSION IN CHILDREN
AS A FUNCTION OF
EXPRESSED MATERNAL ATTITUDES

By

Marcia Patterson King

A THESIS

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

MASTER OF ARTS

Department of Home Management and Child Development

1966

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Appreciation is expressed to Dr. William Marshall for his
guidance. direction, and encouragement in planning and conducting
the study, and for his assistance in gathering the data. Apprecia-
tion is also expressed to Dr. Bernice Borgman and Dr. Lauren Harris
for their helpful suggestions.

Thanks are expressed to Mrs. Huda Giddens, Mrs. Betty Tuttle,
and Mrs. Nancy Ginnings, head teachers at Michigan State University
Laboratory Preschool, for their cooperation in the gathering of the

data.

* * * * 'k 'k 'k

This study was partially supported by the Michigan State

University Agricultural Experiment Station.

* * 'k ‘k 'k * *

ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ..................... . . ii

LIST OF TABLES ........................ iv

LIST OF APPENDICES ...................... v
Chapter

I. INTRODUCTION ..................... l

Dependency ..................... 2

Independence ................... 3

Relation of Dependency and Independence ...... 4

Aggression ..................... 4

II. REVIEW OF LITERATURE ......... . . . . . . . . 6

Measurement of Dependency and Aggression ...... ll

Measurement of Mothers“ Attitudes ......... l5

III. METHODS AND PROCEDURES ................ l7

Assumptions and Hypotheses ............. l7

Selection and Description of Sample . ....... 19

Sears Attitude Scale. . . . . ........... Zl

Observation Instrument ............... 23

IV. PRESENTATION AND DISCUSSION OF RESULTS ...... . . 27

Discussion of Results ............... 34

V. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS ............... 39

REFERENCES .......................... 42

APPENDICES .......................... 44

iii

LIST OF TABLES

Age of Parents ....................

Level of Education of Mothers. . . . .........

Comparison of Odd-Even Item Reliabilities of

Attitude Scales. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Comparison of Odd-Even and Split-Half Reliabilities

of the Observations of Children ...........

Mean Differences Between Mothers According to

Sex of Child ....................

Mean Differences Between Girls and Boys ........

Children's Aggressive Behavior as a Function of
Mothers' Permissiveness and Punitiveness for

Aggression . . . ..................

Children's Dependent Behavior as a Function of
Mothers' Permissiveness and Punitiveness for

Aggression . . . . . ........ . .......

Children's Independent Behavior as a Function of
Mothers' Permissiveness and Punitiveness for

Aggression . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .....

iv

Page
20
21

23

25

27
28

31

32

33

LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix Page
I. Sears Attitude Scale ................. 46

II. Letter Sent to the Mothers .............. 57
III. Observation Instrument ................ 59

CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION

Through socialization the individual acquires, from the wide
range of behavior potentialities available to him at birth, behavior
which is acceptable to his culture. "Culture . . . consists of the
major institutional and social patterns followed by a larger or smaller,

"I The family is the immediate sub-unit

but definable group of persons.
on which the culture is built and through which it is transmitted to the
child. Since the child's earliest social learning occurs in the family,
his early experiences with his family, particularly his mother, are
critical to his socialization and apparently to his personality develop-
ment, since some personality characteristics of adults appear to be
extensions of the effects of early experiences.

As Sears states, "Any process that can help to explain both the
development of personality and the transmission of culture is important
to the behavior sciences, for these two problems are the focal points

for the study of man as a social organism."2 Scientific investigation

of the child rearing process needs further emphasis. It has had a slow

 

1Boyd R. McCandless, Children and Adolescents: Behavior and
Development (New York: Holt. Rinehart, and Winston, 1563), p. 7.

2Robert R. Sears, Eleanor E. Maccoby. and Harry Levin, Patterns
of Child Rearing_(Nhite Plains, New York: Row, Peterson and Company.
1957), p. 4.

start and has been accorded only recently the attention it deserves.
mainly through the work of Sears and his associates.

The present study was designed to investigate the child rearing
process in hopes of supplementing some of the findings on dependency and
aggression from Sears' studies, and further, to investigate the dimen-
sion of independence. A secondary focus of the study. but one crucial
to scientific investigation, involves the method used to gather the data.
The study is limited to the influence of the mother's attitudes on the
child's behavior in three areas -- dependency, independence, and aggres-

sion.

Dependency

Sears views dependency as a product of a child's interactions
with others, mainly with his parents. More specifically, he conceptual-
izes dependency as a learned attribute of behavior-~an acquired drive.
During infancy and early childhood the child's relative helplessness
requires that he depend on others to satisfy his needs. While the child
is developing physical dependence on others, particularly his mother, he
is developing emotional dependence as well.

Beller further theorizes that physical contact with the parent
is associated with drive reduction; for example, when the child is held
while being fed, the physical contact becomes a secondary drive to the
original drive of hunger. When the child no longer needs to be held
during feeding, proximity to the parent acquires secondary drive prop-
erties similar to those of physical contact. Further, in taking care of
the child's physical needs, the parent's paying attention, giving help,

and giving recognition or praise and approval become secondary drives

for the child. Thus, the child learns those behaviors which will elicit
such responses as attention, help, etc.. from the parent. Beller assumes
that physical contact, proximity. attention, help,and recognition "are so
related to one another within individual children that they can be con-

sidered components of a general dependency drive.”3

Independence

While he is learning to be dependent on others, the child is
learning independence as well. As his capacities and skills develop,
he learns to help himself--to become physically independent. Likewise,
he beComes more emotionally independent.

Beller conceives independence as developing from the manner in
which the child associates his own behavior with drive reduction. When
a child takes the initiative, while in a state of need, and manipulates
his environment successfully, initiative becomes associated with drive
reduction. In order for this to happen the parent must permit the child
to manipulate his environment successfully. Under these favorable cir-
cumstances, further aspects of independence develop: overcoming of
obstacles as a means of attacking and solving problems; persistence as
a means of completing activity; activity as a means of gaining satis-
faction just from being active; doing things without adult help as a
means.of gaining satisfaction from doing things by oneself. Beller
makes the assumption also that initiative, overcoming obstacles, per-
sistence. activity.and doing things by oneself constitute a general

independence drive.

 

3Emanuel K. Beller, "Dependency and Independence in Young
Children," The Journal of Genetic Psychology, LXXXVII (1955). p. 26.

Relation of Dependency and Independence

Overprotection and similar conditions which reinforce dependency
and interfere with the development of independent drives contribute to
a negative relation between the two drives. "However," Beller states.
"the same parental practices which produce dependency drives also facil-
itate the growth of independence. In order to encourage the child in
his early attempts to explore and manipulate the environment on his own,

the parent may help and praise the child."4 ThETEfOPE. BEIIEF views

dependency and independence as having a negative but not completely in-

verse or bipolar relation.

Aggression
Aggression is also viewed as a product of the child's interaction

with others. mainly with his parents. Aggression, which Sears defines as
"a goal response to instigation to injure an organism,"5 apparently devel-
ops as the child realizes he can control his environment. or secure com-
pliance with his wishes. by hurting. At first the child can express only
diffuse rage to frustrating situations, such as those caused by restraint
and discomfort. However, he soon learns ways of reacting which help to
get rid of the frustration. Some of these acts are constructive; some
are hurtful to the parent and may be looked upon as the earliest ex-
hibited forms of aggressive behavior.

As the child learns that aggressive acts are often followed by

the relief of discomfort, aggression acquires the quality of a secondary

 

41bid., p. 27.

5Robert R. Sears et 31,, "Some Child Rearing Antecedents of
Aggression and Dependency-Tn Young Children." Genetic Psychology Mono-
graphs, xxxxv11 (1953). p. 179.

drive. The child begins to respond aggressively to a good many frustra-
tions in a purely automatic way, directing toward other people actual
attacks, threatened attacks. hostile or provocative language, or inter-
fering with others' activities. The child may even develop a secondary
drive whereby he will seek the circumstances which surround gratifica-
tion. He may see the signs of pain in another person at the moment
frustration is removed, and hurt others for the sake of hurting.

Sears conceptualizes the origins of dependent and aggressive
behavior as a function of the mother's motives of nurturance and pain
avoidance which make her receptive to the child's signals for help and
compliance. "The child quickly learns to perform the actions that have
these signal qualities; in one instance these are 'aggressive' acts, in
another 'dependent' or 'attention-getting.'"6 The nature of both kinds
of acts elicited by the child is a function of the child's tempo, his
demands, or his tendency to be responsive or unresponsive, as well as a
function of the mother's personality. of the signals to which she is

responsive.

 

CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF LITERATURE

Comprehensive studies of the child rearing process have been
done by Sears and his associates. In l947-48 Sears, Whiting, Nowlis.
and Sears7 made a pilot study of some of the child rearing antecedents
of dependent and aggressive behavior using as subjects 40 preschool-age
children and their mothers. Direct behavior unit observations in the
preschool and teachers' ratings were used to measure the children's
overt aggressive, dependent, and nurturant behavior.' Doll play was also
used to measure fantasy aggression. dependency, and nurturance; however,
data from the doll play are presented in another report.8 Information
about characteristics of the children's infant and current experiences
were obtained in recorded interviews with the mothers. Subsequently,
the interviews were rated on twelve scales designed to measure severity
of infant and current frustration, amount of current maternal nurtur-
ance, and severity of the mother's punitiveness toward the child.

The main conclusions of the study are: (l) the kind and amount
of frustration and punishment reportedly experienced by the child are

major determinants of the properties of both the dependency and the

 

71m.

8Pauline S. Sears, "Measurement of Dependency and Aggression
in Doll Play," American Psychologist, III (1948), p. 263.

aggressive drives; (2) there are radical sex differences in the proc-
esses by which these drives are developed, differences that probably are
a function of the different identification of boys and girls with their
mothers; and (3) there are deep and pervasive differences in maternal
treatment of boys and girls after the first year of life.9

As a follow-up to the above study, in l951-52 Sears, Maccoby,
and Levin10 interviewed 379 mothers of kindergarten-age children on
several dimensions of their own behavior, as well as on certain aspects '
of their children's behavior. Subsequently, the interviews were rated
on each of the various dimensions. .Several important findings concerned
with feeding, toilet training, dependency, sex, and aggression were
revealed.

Apparently dependency and aggression involve similar anteced-
ents--withdrawal of love and punishment of dependent or aggressive
behavior. Sears, Maccoby, and Levin found that those mothers who openly
express their affection for the child, but repeatedly threaten the
affectional bond by withholding love for disciplinary purposes and by
being punitive toward the child's displays of parent-directed aggression,
have the most dependent children. Moreover, if the mother is inconsis-
tent in the ways she handles her child's dependent advances, the child
is more likely to be dependent.

The findings relative to aggression suggest that the mothers who
make it clear that aggression is frowned upon and stop aggression when

it occurs but who avoid punishing the child for his aggression have the

 

9Robert R. Sears 3311., 93. 913., pp. 233-34.

10Sears, Maccoby, and Levin, op, cit,

least aggressive children. While the mother's permissiveness of aggres-
sion and punitiveness of aggression influence the child's aggressive
behavior, apparently rules and restriction do not. Sears, Maccoby, and
Levin found that the degree of restrictiveness made a negligible contri-
bution to the child's aggressiveness.

In the most recent and most comprehensive study of child rearing,
Sears, Rau, and Alpertn in 1958 examined the interrelations and child-
rearing antecedents of several types of child behavior of 40 four-year-
olds, including dependency, aggression, adult role, gender role, guilt,
and resistance to temptation. Measures of child behavior were obtained
through behavior unit observations, observer ratings, and doll play, as
well as through mother-child interactions, interviews with both mothers
and fathers, and a behavior maturity scale. Parent measures were drawn
from the parent interviews, mother-child interaction, and questionnaires
or attitude scales given to the mothers. The research, based on Sears'
identification theory, resulted in several complex findings relevant to
the dimensions of dependency and aggression.

'Sears, Rau, and Alpert found support for the hypotheses “that

(l) continuing permissiveness for sexual and dependent behavior and
(2) frustration through the withholding of love and affection. serve
as instigators and/or reinforcers of dependency behavior."12 HOW-
ever, they caution that sex differences in the variables considered

and lack of clear intercorrelational evidence for a unitary

 

11Robert R. Sears, Lucy Rau, and Richard Alpert, Identification
agd Child Rearing (Stanford, California: Stanford University Press,
65).

‘21 id., p. 72.

trait of dependency suggest that the relations between child rearing
practices and the several types of dependent behavior are more compli-
cated than their hypotheses have implied.

The findings relative to aggression reflect several sex differ-
ences. Apparently current pressures and restrictions in the home are
not associated with higher direct aggression and lower indirect or atten-
uated aggression in boys, whereas the opposite holds for girls. Girls
apparently perceive which parent the mother esteems more highly, herself
or the father. The child then tends to pattern her aggressive behavior
after that of the model which is more esteemed by the mother. The in-
trusion of the opposite-sexed parent into a child's rearing tends to
establish certain elements of that parent's behavior in the child.

Other findings show that non-permissiveness for aggression in
the home is associated with low aggression toward parents but high aggres-
sion in nursery school, whereas permissiveness for aggression toward
parents results in an increase in aggression in the home and a reduction
of aggression in the nursery school. Punishment for aggression by either
parent does not tend to increase aggression in the home. Furthermore,
there is no clear indication of an inhibiting effect on aggression with
even the most severely punished children.

Two related studies of child rearing, by McCord, McCord, and
associates, deal with familial correlates of dependency and aggression
in boys on a longitudinal rather than a cross-sectional basis. Both
studies are based on a sample of boys drawn from the Cambridge-Sommerville
Youth Project. Although the children, who averaged 9 years in age at the
beginning of the study, came mainly from lower class families, none of

the correlates of social class was related to the child's dependency or

IO

aggression. Material for the studies was gathered from observations,
tests, and reports made between 1939 and l945. Between l956 and l958
independent raters recategorized this information.

The pertinent findings on dependency suggest that (1) lack of
cohesion within the family and parental rejection of the child serve to
heighten, rather than to decrease, the child's overt dependent behavior;
and (2) 'adult-dependent' boys may have come from an environment charac—
terized by strict supervision, pervasive parental guidance,and a gener-
ally authoritarian regimen, whereas 'peer-dependent' boys may have
suffered from a lack of guidance and control by their parents, and
'pervasively-dependent' boys seemed to have been offered an intimate;
example of passive dependence in their father's behavior.13 «

In the study on aggression it was found that (l) aggressive boys
were most likely to have been raised by rejecting, punitive parents who
failed to impose direct control on their behavior, offered them examples
as deviant models, and often were involved in tense conflict; (2) non-
aggressive boys were reared by affectionate, non-punitive parents who
guided them by a consistent set of controls and exposed them to examples
of social conformity; and (3) assertive boys were reared by relatively
affectionate, non-threatening parents; however, these parents often
failed to impose consistent controls, were deviant models, and often

were in open conflict.14

 

13William McCord, Joan McCord, and Paul Verden, "Familial and
Behavioral Correlates of Dependency in Male Children," Child Development,
XXXIII (1962), pp. 313-26.

 

14William McCord, Joan McCord, and Alan Howard, "Familial Corre-
lates of Aggression in Nondeliquent Male Children,” Journal of Abnormal
and Social Psychology, LXII (1961), pp. 79-93.

ll

Measurement of Dependency and Aggression

Researchers have measured dependency and aggression in various
ways, for example, rating scales‘5’16 and projective doll play,]7’]8’19
as well as other projective techniques.20'2‘:22 However, the methods of
pertinent interest here are observation techniques.

Heathers (l955),23 used three-minute observations to obtain run-
ning account records of children's behavior. The observation records
were then scored by recording each occurence of a response falling in

the scoring categories or subcategories of emotional dependence, emotion-

al independence, and type of play situation.

 

15Beller, pp. git.

16Alberta E. Siegel, “Aggressive Behavior of Youn Children in
the Absence of an Adult," Child Development, XXVIII (1957 . pp. 371-78.

17Pauline S. Sears, 9p, git,

18Harry Levin and Robert R. Sears, "Identification with Parents
as a Determinant of Doll Play Aggression," Child Development, XXVII
(l956), pp. 135-55.

 

19Jesse E. Gordon and Edward Smith, "Children's Aggression,
Parental Attitudes and the Effects of an Affiliation-Arousin Story,"
ggurnal of Personality and Social Psychology, I, No. 6 (1965 , pp. 654-

20P.H. Mussen and H.K. Naylor, "The Relationships Between Overt
and Fantasy Aggression," Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology,
XLIX (l954), pp. 235-40.

21J.R. Smith and J.C. Coleman, "The Relationship Between Manifes-
tations of Hostility in Projective Tests and Overt Behavior," Journal of
Projective Techniques, XX (l956), pp. 326-34.

 

22K. Purcell, "The TAT and Antisocial Behavior,“ Journal of
ConsultingPsychology, xx (1956), pp. 449-56.

 

23Glen Heathers, "Emotional Dependence and Independence in
Nursery School Play," The Journal of Genetic Psychology, LXXXVII (1955),
pp. 37-57.

 

12

Hartup and Keller (l960)24 also used three-minute observations in
their study of the relation between nurturance and dependency in preschool
children. However, the procedure actually yielded two-minute observations,
since the observers spent the first 30 seconds becoming familiar with the
situation in which the child was involved and the last 30 seconds for
observation of the consequences of any nurturant or dependent behavior
that had occurred. The observers used a direct behavior measure, obtain-
ing a frequency count of all behavior which occurred during the middle
two-minute phase of the observation relevant to predetermined nurturance
and dependency categories.

Observer agreements for dependency were 90 percent for prelimi-
nary observations and 89 percent for sample reliability observations made
during the study. To estimate the stability of the total scores, odd-
even correlations were made. The odd-even correlation for dependency
was +.69.

Walters, Pearce, and Dahms (1957)25 also used direct observation,
employing predetermined categories and one-minute time sampling periods
in a study of the affectional and aggressive behavior of preschool chil-
dren. All of the affectional and_aggressive behaviors which occurred
within a given minute were recorded by checking the appropriate category
or subcategory for physical affection, verbal affection, physical aggres-

sion, or verbal aggression.

 

24Willard W. Hartup and E. Duwayne Keller, "Nurturance in Pre-
school Children and its Relation to Dependency," Child Development,
XXXI (l960), pp. 681-89.

25J.C. Walters, Doris Pearce, and Lucille Dahms, "Affectional

and Aggressive Behavior of Preschool Children," Child Development,
XXVIIII (1957). pp. 15-26.

13

Preliminary observations, made for the purpose of obtaining meas-
ures of reliability, revealed an average agreement of 85 percent.

Recently, Brown and Elliott (1965)26 used Walters, Pearce. and
Dahms' (1957) physical aggression and verbal aggression categories but
employed five-minute observation periods and measured the children's
aggressive behavior in each of four different periods in the experiment:
Pre-treatment, first treatment, follow-up, and second treatment. The
correlation between observers of total aggressive responses checked in
each of 24 five-minute periods was .97.

None of the above studies reported any attempt to validate its
instruments, and only one, the Hartup and Keller study, reported an
estimate of the reliability of the scores and of the observations. Sears'
studies provide more nearly complete reliability and validity informa-
tion.

In the Sears, Whiting, Nowlis, and Sears (1953) study, the chil-
dren were observed for 15-minute periods. Scores were obtained by a
frequency count, during each lS-minute period, of the occurrence of be-
havior under the dependency and aggressive categories. The mean observer
agreement on the dependency subcategories was 91 percent; on total de-
pendency, 94 percent. The mean agreement on aggression subcategories
was 86 percent; on total aggression, 91 percent.

Besides obtaining measures of dependency and aggression through
behavior unit observations, Sears §t_gl, obtained parallel measures

through teachers' ratings. The correlations between rated dependency

 

26Paul Brown and Rogers Elliott, "Control of Aggression in a
Nursery School Class,” Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 11
(1965), pp. 108-20.

14

and observed dependency for boys was +.44, for girls, zero. The low
correlations raise a question as to the validity of both sets of meas-
ures. Sears gt_gl, write that the fact that the observations are based
primarily on frequency, whereas the ratings take other indices of strength
into account, gives some explanation of the low correlations.

With reSpect to aggression, the situation is better. The cor-
relation between rated aggression and observed aggression was +.64 for
boys and +.48 for girls.

Sears, Rau, and Alpert (1965) used the same dependency categories
as were used in the above Sears study, but they recorded the children's
behavior for ten-minute periods. The observer agreement percentages were
78 percent for dependency, 70 percent for antisocial aggression and
61 percent for prosocial aggression.

Trait consistency was estimated from scores computed from the
records of each observer separately and from scores computed on each
variable on each child for each of three time periods. The corrected
mean intercorrelations among the four observers were .74 on dependency,
.85 on antisocial aggression and .74 on prosocial aggression. The cor-.
rected mean intercorrelations among the three time periods were .63 for
dependency, .79 for antisocial aggression and .73 for prosocial aggres-
sion.

With respect to the question of validity, the previously men-
tioned low intercorrelations between the various measures of dependency
led the researchers to conclude, "The evidence for a basic trait of
dependency behavior is unsatisfactory for girls and clearly lacking for

boys . . ."27 However, the moderately high intercorrelations between

 

27Sears, Rau, and Alpert, pp, 913,, p. 42.

15

various measures of aggression suggest a clear syndrome of aggression

for boys, but a less clear syndrome for girls.

Measurement of Mothers' Attitudes

From mothers' statements in the original Patterns of Child
Rearing interviews, Sears constructed five pencil and paper attitude
scales measuring permissiveness for indoor nudity, permissiveness for
masturbation, permissiveness for social sex play, permissiveness for
aggression toward parents, and punishment for aggression toward parents.
In the Sears, Rau, and Alpert (1965) study these attitude scales were
administered. Moreover, parent interviews were undertaken. In a sepa-
rate report28 Sears presents findings comparing the interviews with the
questionnaires as a method for measuring mothers' attitudes toward sex
and aggression. He reports that with independently obtained measures of
children's behavior, the interview measures generated more statistically
significant correlations. However, the attitude scales correlated better
with the mothers' observed behavior and proved more effective for repli-
cating group differences discovered in previous studies. (Further dis-
cussion of the Sears Attitude Scale will be undertaken in Chapter III.)

This review of literature presents several points of view re-
garding child rearing antecedants of dependent and aggressive behavior.
However, it appears that the recent material from the Sears, Rau, and-
Alpert study raises the most significant points about the diverse and

complex variables involved in the relations between child rearing

 

28Robert R. Sears, "Comparison of Interviews with Questionnaires
for Measuring Mothers' Attitudes Toward Sex and Ag ression," Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, II, No. l (1965?, pp. 37-44.

16

practices and dependent and aggressive behavior of children.

Further, the studies on the measurement of the variables empha-
size the problems involved in measuring such diverse and complex vari-
ables. From these studies one realizes that although it is relatively
easy to establish observer reliability, obtaining measures of stability,
consistency, and validity is much more difficult, especially with the

dimension of dependency.

CHAPTER III
METHODS AND PROCEDURES

In the foregoing chapters the theoretical formulations for the
development of dependency, independence, and aggression were discussed
and relevant studies on these dimensions were presented. Since it is
the purpose of this study to supplement some of the findings from the
Sears studies on dependency and aggression, as well as consider the
dimension of independence, emphasis was placed on a review of the work
of Sears and his associates. It is mainly on thebasis of their work

that the assumptions and hypotheses for this study were made.

Assumptions and Hypotheses

Assumption 1. A child's behavior, measured over a period of
several weeks in a nursery school situation, is typical of his nursery
school behavior. I

Assumption II. The Sears Attitude Scale is a valid and reliable
instrument for measuring parental attitudes toward child rearing.

The following hypotheses were made for this study:

Hypothesis I. Mothers display the following similarities and
differences in.their treatment of boys and girls, as measured on the
Sears Attitude Scale:

(a) mothers of girls and mothers of boys are not differen-

tially permissive or restrictive for rules and regulations.

17

18

(b) mothers of girls and mothers of boys are not differen-
tially punitive for aggression toward parents.

(c) mothers of boys are more permissive of aggression toward
parents than mothers of girls.

(d) mothers of boys are more permissive of dependent behav-
ior than mothers of girls.

Hypothesis II. There are sex differences in children's overt

behavior:
(a) girls display greater dependent behavior in preschool
than boys. ‘
(b) girls display less independent behavior in preschool
than boys.
(c) girls diSplay less aggressive behavior in preschool
than boys.

Hypothesis III. Maternal punitiveness has a stronger and more
inhibiting effect on girls than on boys, resulting in:

(a) a negative correlation between maternal punitiveness
and dependent behavior for girls.

(b) a positive correlation between maternal punitiveness
and dependent behavior for boys.

Hypothesis IV. A moderate negative relation exists between the
dependence and independence dimensions.

Hypothesis V. The amount of current frustration (restrictive-
ness) in the home environment contributes no variance to the measures of
aggressive behavior in preschool..

Hypothesis VI. Severity of the mother's punishment for aggres-

sive behavior has a curvilinear relation with amount of aggression

19

displayed in preschool.

Hypothesis VII. With respect to the dual influence of permis-
siveness for aggression toward parents and punitiveness for aggression
toward parents, it is expected that:

(a) mothers who are high on permissiveness and high on
punitiveness for aggression toward parents will have the most
aggressive children.

(b) mothers who are low on permissiveness and low on puni-
tiveness for aggression toward parents will have the least
aggressive children.

(c) mothers who are low on permissiveness and high on puni-
tiveness for aggression toward parents will have the most
dependent children.

(d) mothers who are high on permissiveness and low on puni-
tiveness for aggression toward parents will have the least
dependent children.

(e) mothers who are high on permissiveness and low on puni-
tiveness for aggression toward parents will have the most in-
dependent children.

(f) mothers who are low on permissiveness and high on puni-
tiveness for aggression toward parents will have the least in-

dependent children.

Selection and Description of Sample

The three groups of four-to-five-year old children enrolled at .
the Michigan State University Laboratory Preschool during the fall term
of 1965, and their mothers, comprised the sample for this study. The

20

mean age of the children was 4 years, 5 months. Of the original 44
children and their mothers, four were dropped from the sample. One
mother was foreign born and did not know sufficient English to answer
the questionnaire; one mother had previously answered the questionnaire
in connection with another study; and two of the children were dropped
because of continued absences owing to illness. The final sample of 40
children consisted of 2l boys and 19 girls.

The parents of children attending the Laboratory Preschool are
generally university faculty members or parents engaged in other pro-
fessions who reside in the East Lansing, Michigan, area. However, four
of the children, who were in one of the groups, came from lower class
families.

All of the mothers were married and living with their husbands,
except one mother who was separated from her husband. Tables 1 and 2
provide additional background information on age of parents and level of

education of the mothers.

TABLE l.--Age of Parents

 

 

Age in Years

 

25-29 30-34 35-39 40-44 45-49 50-54 55-59 Total

 

Mothers N 5 12 12 7 3 o o 39*
Fathers N O 10 lo 10 4 2 2 38

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mean Age: Mothers - 36.2
Fathers - 39.9

 

*One mother gave neither her age nor her husband's age; another
mother did not give her husband's age.

21

TABLE 2.--Level of Education of Mothers

 

 

Level of Education

 

P
O
O
5-:
l- r— 00
O O V) m
.8 go: :m ' '03
S- '0!!!
U UH um d) ‘80 0- 06
r- m WM "'0 U) >o— >3. >3-
00 3 CC 0 0P0 09-0 ‘PO I'-
'00 an: :1: .c-v- on- as: 0.1-9 as» on
0.: EU» GNU um go— 09 um 00 4.:
L0 O°r- w-S- in: O on was (DO 0
(DU) U13: Its I—oo mu mm cg: 0:63 I—

 

Mothers N

N
_a
N
N
00
_a
N
_.I
_.a
N
«b
O

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Sears Attitude Scale

To ascertain the attitudes of the 40 mothers toward their chil-
dren's dependent and aggressive behavior, four attitude scales, compiled
as a questionnaire, were used (see Appendix I). The questionnaire was
administered to the mothers in small groups at the Laboratory Preschool
(see Appendix II). Three mothers who were unable to come to the nursery
school answered the questionnaire at home.

Sets of declaratory sentences from the mother interviews of the
Patterns of Child Rearing study formed the scales. Each sentence was

followed by five boxes labelled, from left to right, strongly agree,

 

ggggg, not sure, disagree, and strongly disagree. The mothers were asked
to read each statement and indicate their feeling about the statement by
checking one of the five labelled boxes. The items were scored on a
five-point scale, with the most permissive answer receiving five points
and the least permissive answer receiving one point. However, on the

scale for punishment for aggression toward parents the most punitive

22

answer received five points and the least punitive answer received one
point.

The scales on the questionnaire measured Rules and Restrictions
(30 items); Permissiveness for Dependent Behavior (15 items); Punitive-
ness for Aggression Toward Parents (15 items); and Permissiveness for
Aggression Toward Parents (20 items).

The total possible score for each of the scales is listed below:

Rules and Restrictions 150
Permissiveness for Dependent Behavior 75
Punitiveness for Aggression Toward Parents 75

Permissiveness for Aggression Toward Parents lOO

TWo of the scales, Punitiveness for Aggression Toward Parents
and Permissiveness for Aggression Toward Parents, came from the attitude
scale developed by Sears from the Patterns of Child Rearing interviews,
and administered in the Identification and Child Rearing study. Sears,
using odd-even item correlations and the Spearman-Brown correction,
found these scales to have high reliabilities. The scales also corre-
lated significantly with the mother interview scales based on the same
sample.29

The two other scales, Rules and Restrictions and Permissiveness
for Dependent Behavior, were developed by Jones.30 The reliabilities of

the rules and restrictions and dependency scales were computed also by

odd-even item correlations with the Spearman-Brown correction. Jones

 

29Ibid.

3oLaurel M. Jones, "An Attitude Measure of Parental Permissive-
ness” (unpublished Master's thesis, Stanford University, 1961).

23

considers these reliabilities "quite satisfactory," although they are
somewhat lower than the reliabilities of the two Sears scales.
Table 3 presents the reliabilities of the scores of the present

study as compared with the reliabilities obtained by Sears and by Jones.

TABLE 3.--Comparison of Odd-Even Item Reliabilities of Attitude Scales

 

 

 

 

Sears Data Jones Data PresggtaStudy
Attitude Scale
Dimensions * Spear * Spear * Spear
N Raw Brown. N Raw Brown. N Raw Brown.
Rules and
Restrictions 106 .48 .65 4O .58 .73
Dependency 106 .47 .64 4O .44 .61
Punitiveness
for Aggression 4O .76 .86 ' 4O .58 .73
Permissiveness
for Aggression 4O .76 .86 4O .81 .90

 

 

 

 

*N = the number of mothers.

Observation Instrument

From the emotional dependence, emotional independence, and play
categories of Heathers and the physical aggression and verbal aggression
scales of Walters, Pearce,and Dahms, an observation schedule was devel-
Oped to measure the frequency of the children's dependent, independent,
and aggressive behavior in the nursery school (see Appendix III). The
play categories were used mainly to help establish observer agreement in
the preliminary stages of the study and were not used in computing the

children's final scores.

24

The percentage of observer agreement was computed by the follow-
ing formula:

Sum of Agreements of Two Observers

 

Sum of Agreements + Sum of Disagreements

During a preliminary two-week period five measures of observer
reliability were made by using three-minute sample observations. The
first measure resulted in a 62 percent agreement between observers; the
final established measure of reliability was 79 percent.

Following the establishing of observer reliability, 20 three-
minute observations were made on each of the 40 children. The observa-
tions were rotated so that the 20 observations for each child would be
representative of the total two-hour (approximately) nursery school
period. An attempt to have one observation for each child in each five-
minute span of the nursery school period was satisfactorily, although
not rigidly, carried out. No more than three observations were made on
one child in a single day. Any multiple observations on a single child
in a single day were spaced at least 15 minutes apart.

A total frequency count in each of the categories--emotional
dependence, emotional independence, and physical and verbal aggression
combined--for the 20 three-minute observations gave each child scores on
three dimensions.

To get a measure of how consistent the children were with re-
spect to their frequency of displaying dependency, independence, or
aggression, odd-even correlations were computed with the observations
arranged in time-order sequence based on five-minute spans of the two-
hour nursery school period. The Spearman-Brown correction was computed

on the raw scores.

25

As a further check on consistency of the children's behavior, a
split-half reliability check was made, comparing the observations of the
children made during the first hour of the nursery school period with
those made during the second hour. The Spearman-Brown correction was
also employed in this computation. Table 4 shows the results of both
the odd-even and split-half reliabilities.

TABLE 4.—-Comparison of Odd-Even and Split-Half Reliabilities of the
Observations of Children

 

 

 

 

Odd-Even Split-Half
Observation
Dimen51ons N Raw Spggguzn N Raw Spgggmgn
Dependency 40 .24. .39 40 .34 .51
Independence 40 .53 .69 4O .20 .33
Aggression 40 .38 .55 4O .46 .63

 

 

 

 

The low correlations and the inconsistency between the two
methods of computing reliabilities raise doubts as to both the relia-
bility of the observation instrument and the inherent consistency of
the children's dependent, independent, and aggressive behavior. However,
the raw scores reflect not only the consistency dimension of the chil-
dren's behavior as measured by the instrument, but also the reliability
of the observers which, although satisfactory, was not extremely high
(79 percent).

In the Walters, Pearce, and Dahms study, the subcategory, "Re-
fuses to comply," was included in the overall verbal aggression category.

In the Sears, Rau, and Alpert study, refusing to comply was listed as

26

negative attention seeking under the dependency category. In the present
study it was felt that refusing to comply was more representative of in-
dependent behavior than dependent behavior or aggressive behavior and,
thus, was listed under emotional independence. Intercorrelations of the
children's scores give support for this recategorization, as "refuses to
comply" correlated significantly with total independence (+.45) but had

virtually no correlation with dependency and aggression (-.02 and zero).

CHAPTER IV
PRESENTATION AND DISCUSSION OF RESULTS

The results of this study will be presented and discussed in
terms of the hypotheses outlined in Chapter III.
Hypothesis I. To test the first hypothesis, the means and stand-

 

ard deviations of the scores on the Sears Attitude Scale were computed
separately for the mothers of the boys and for the mothers of the girls.
Mean differences between the mothers according to sex of child were
obtained. As shown in Table 5, none of the comparisons was significant.

TABLE 5.--Mean Differences Between Mothers' Scores on the Sears Attitude
Scale According to Sex of Child

 

 

 

 

Mothers of Girls Mothers of Boys

Attitude

Scale T ' '
Dimensions N Mean 5.0. N Mean S.D. C.R.
Rules and
Restrictions 19 85.05 14.42 21 85.81 11.73 n.s.
Dependency 19 47.16 5.19 21 46.57 5.13 n.s.
Punitiveness
for Aggression 19 42.26 7.28 21 43.10 6.71 n.s.
Permissiveness
for Aggression 19 58.89 11.00 21 57.86 9.52 n.s.

 

 

 

 

:— r 7 w 1'

As computed from scores on the Sears Attitude Scale, the critical

27

28

ratios are not significant. Therefore: (a) mothers of girls and mothers
of boys show no difference in regard to permissiveness or restrictiveness
for rules and regulations; (b) mothers of girls and mothers of boys show
no difference in regard to punitiveness for aggression toward parents;
(c) mothers of boys do not show themselves as being more permissive of
aggression toward parents than do mothers of girls; and (d) mothers of
boys do not show themselves as being more permissive of dependent behav-
ior than do mothers of girls.

Hypothesis II. Means and standard deviations were also computed
to test the second hypothesis, but for this hypothesis the children's
observation scores were used. Mean differences between the boys and the
girls on each of the dimensions, dependency, independence, and aggres-
sion, were obtained. As shown in Table 6, none of the differences was

significant.

TABLE 6.--Mean Differences Between Girls' and Boys' Observation Scores

 

 

 

 

Girls Boys
Observation
Dimensions 7
Mean 5.0. Mean S.D. C.R.
Dependency 97.26 13.14 95.57 14.18 n.s.
Independence 38.63 13.24 42.48 9.50 n.s.
Aggression 12.68 7.77 14.38 8.42 n.s.

 

 

 

 

Since all the sections of Hypothesis II postulate sex differ-
ences--gir1s display greater dependent behavior in preschool than boys,

girls display less independent behavior in preschool than boys, and girls

29

display less aggressive behavior in preschool than boys--no part of the
hypothesis is supported by the findings.

Hypothesis III. To test the hypothesis that there would be a
negative correlation between maternal punitiveness and dependent behavior
for girls and a positive correlation between maternal punitiveness and
dependent behavior for boys, the mothers' scores on punitiveness for
aggression toward parents and the children's scores on emotional depend-
ence were used. Pearson product-moment correlations yielded [)5 of
-.33 for the girls and -.05 for the boys. The correlation for the boys,
although slightly in the opposite direction from that hypothesized, is
not significant. The correlation for the girls is significant at the
.1 level. Thus, the first part of the hypothesis, a negative correla-
tion between maternal punitiveness and dependent behavior for girls, is
supported, while the second part, a positive correlation between maternal
punitiveness and dependent behavior for boys, is not.

Hypothesis IV. The fourth hypothesis assumes a moderate nega-
tive relation between the dependence and independence dimensions. The
computed Pearsonian §_of +.O4 is not significant.

Hypothesis V. To test the hypothesis that the amount of current
frustration in the home environment contributes no variance to the
measures of aggressive behavior in preschool, the mothers' scores on
rules and restrictions and the children's scores on aggression were
correlated. The correlation of -.19 is not significant. Therefore,
the null hypothesis is not rejected.

Hypothesis VI. The Pearson product-moment correlation between

 

the mothers' scores on punitiveness for aggression toward parents and

the children's scores on aggression was low (+.O7) and non-significant

30

and, thus, gave no suggestion of a linear relation. A scatter diagram
was made to see whether there was the curvilinear relation hypothesized
between severity of punishment by the mother for aggressive behavior and
amount of aggression displayed in preschool. However, the scatter dia-
gram provided no support for this hypothesis.

Hypothesis VII. A chi-square analysis was used to test the com-
plex relations of the combination of the mothers' permissiveness for
aggression toward parents with the children's dependent, independent, and
aggressive behavior. The computations were made to ascertain whether the
combined variables were significantly related to the dimensions of depend-
ence, independence, and aggression. The group mean score on each vari-

able was chosen as the dividing point for classifying the mothers as high
or low on permissiveness and on punitiveness, and for classifying the
children as high or low on dependency, on independence, and on aggression.
Tables 7, 8, and 9 show the categorization of the variables and the re-
sults of the chi-square analysis.

From the tables it can be seen that the following findings from
the mothers' scores on the attitude scale and the children's scores on
the observations are significant:

. (a) mothers low on permissiveness and high on punitiveness tend
to have children high on aggression.

(b) mothers high on permissiveness and low on punitiveness tend
to have children low on aggression.

(c) mothers low on permissiveness and high on punitiveness tend
to have children high on dependency.

(d) mothers low on permissiveness and high on punitiveness tend

to have children low on independence.

33

TABLE 9.--Children's Independent Behavior as a Function of Mothers'
Permissiveness and Punitiveness for Aggression

 

f—m

 

Children

 

High Independence

Low Independence

 

 

 

 

Mothers - N Percent N Percent
Low Permissiveness-
Low Punitiveness 3 15.8 2 9.5
Low Permissiveness-
High Punitiveness 5 26.3 10 47.6
High Permissiveness-
Low Punitiveness 8 42.1 7 33.4
High Permissiveness-
High Punitiveness .;;_ 15.8 2 9.5
Total 19 100.0 21 100.0
x2 = 2.35 x2 = 7.83
d. f. = 1 d. f. = 1
Not significant. Significant

 

 

at .01 level.

 

34

The Coefficients of Contingency, which give estimates of the
strength of the above relations, are .46, .42, .59, and .52, respec-
tively.

The hypothesized relations--that mothers high on permissiveness
and high on punitiveness will have the most aggressive children, and
mothers low on permissiveness and low on punitiveness will have the
least aggressive children--are only partially supported. ‘In the pres-
ent study, while high punitiveness is related to high aggression and low
punitiveness is related to low aggression, the permissiveness variable
is reversed.

Two of the remaining hypothesized relations--mothers low on per-
missiveness and high on punitiveness will have the most dependent chil-
dren, and mothers low on permissiveness and high on punitiveness will
have the least independent children--are supported by the findings. How-
ever, findings on the other two hypothesized relations--mothers high on
permissiveness and low on punitiveness will have the least dependent
children, and mothers high on permissiveness and low on punitiveness will
have the most independent children--are not significant, although tend-

encies in the hypothesized directions were found.

Discussion of Results

 

Findings on differences between child rearing practices of
mothers of girls and mothers of boys have not been consistent on all
variables. In various studies the differences have been sometimes sig-
nificant and sometimes not. Sears, Whiting, Nowlis, and Sears concluded
that greater demands are placed on girls than on boys for non-dependent

behavior, but they caution, "None of these findings has much statistical

35

significance and until the measures can be repeated on other groups, one
must have low confidence in them."31 In Jones' study, mothers' scores

on the attitude scale, in the direction of greater permissiveness for
dependency for boys, are not significant beyond the .15 level.32 There-
fore, although the data from the present study do not support the hypoth-
esis that mothers of boys are more permissive of dependent behavior than
mothers of girls, they do give support for the questionable significance
of previous findings.

In the report comparing interviews with questionnaires for meas-
uring mothers' attitudes,33 Sears states that the attitudes scales
showed that mothers of boys were slightly more permissive for aggres-
sion (p = .08) than were mothers of girls. Jones, however, did not find
such a significant difference in her study. The data from the present
study support Jones' findings, not Sears' findings.

The lack of sex differences in the children's dependent, in-
dependent, and aggressive behavior may be due to the limitation of the
use of the total scores in each category. Sears, Whiting, Nowlis, and
Sears found that girls were more dependent toward teachers than were
boys; Sears, Rau, and Alpert state that tattling can be described as a
feminine form of aggression and injury to others as masculine. Sub-
category differences such as these are hidden or cancelled out with the
use of the total score. Analysis of the subcategory items from the

present study might reveal some significant sex differences.

 

3‘Robert R. Sears gt_gl,, 9p, £13,, p. 175.
32Jones, gp, git.

33Robert R. Sears, 9p, git,

36

Another possible influence on the lack of sex differences may be
based on the use of frequency count in the observations. Measures of
strength or intensity of behavior may have revealed differences unac-
counted for by the frequency count.

A third contribution to the lack of sex differences may lie in
the homogeneity of age of the group. In the Sears, Whiting, Nowlis.and
Sears study, where significant sex differences were found on total de—
pendency as well as on subcategory dependency items, the age range of
the group was from 3 years, 4 months to 5 years, 5 months. In the pres-
ent study the age range was more restricted, from 3 years, 11 months to
5 years.

The hypothesis that a negative correlation exists between mater-
nal punitiveness and dependent behavior for girls is supported by the
findings of the present study. However, the hypothesis that a positive
correlation exists between maternal punitiveness and dependent behavior
for boys is not supported. Why this hypothesis is not supported in the
present study appears to be more comprehensible in light of evidence from
two of the Sears studies. Sears, Whiting, Nowlis, and Sears (1958) found
a significant positive correlation (+.29) between maternal punitiveness
and dependent behavior for boys, but Sears, Rau, and Alpert (1965) did
not. However, Sears, Rau, and Alpert did find a significant negative
correlation (-.44) between paternal punitiveness for aggression toward
parents and observed dependent behavior for boys. Thus, the child's
identification with the parent of the same sex appears to be a signifi-
cant factor in the relation between parental punitiveness and the child's
dependent behavior. I

The hypothesized moderate negative relation between the

37

dependence and independence dimensions was not found in the present
study. In fact, no relation was found between the dimensions. While
the data support Beller's view of a non-bipolar relation between depend-
ence and independence, they also raise doubts as to the existence of
even a moderate relation between the two dimensions.

The findings of the present study have some rather significant
implications with respect to the dual influence of maternal permissive-
ness for aggression toward parents and punitiveness for aggression toward
parents on the dependent, independent, and aggressive behavior of the
children. Although permissiveness and punitiveness for aggression are
significantly related to the high aggressive behavior and low aggressive
behavior of the children as scored on the observations, the variables
apparently have an even stronger influence on the high dependent and low
independent behavior of the children.

Sears, Maccoby, and Levin found that children more severely pun-
ished for aggression toward parents were considerably dependent and
suggest that punishment for aggression proves to be significant because,
"the child's aggression toward the parent is in itself an action which
threatens the affectional bond between them. Possibly the parent's
response has the quality of a response in kind--it may mean 'All right,
if you don't love me, I don't love you either.‘ Such implications evi-
dently provide a stimulus . . . for the child to seek reassurance that
his parent does in fact still love him."34 However, as shown by the
negative relation between maternal punitiveness and dependent behavior

for girls in the present study, and the negative relation between

 

34Sears, Maccoby, and Levin, gp, 513,, p. 171.

38

paternal punitiveness and dependent behavior for-boys in the Sears, Rau,
and Alpert study, identification with the same-sexed parent tends to lead
to inhibition of dependent behavior. I .

In the present study the small number of subjects did not enable
categorization of the boys and the girls separately for chi-square anal-
ysis. With more subjects, and with measures of paternal permissiveness
and punitiveness for aggression, a chi-square analysis could provide use-
ful information about the relation of permissiveness and punitiveness to

the inhibition and augmentation of dependent behavior.

CHAPTER V
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

This study was designed to investigate various aspects of the
child rearing process, specifically, the influence of the mother's re-
ported behavior on the child's behavior in three areas--dependency,
independence, and aggression.

The subjects were 40 children who were attending the Laboratory
Preschool at Michigan State University during fall term 1965, and their
mothers. The parents were predominantly university faculty members or
parents in other professions who reside in the East Lansing, Michigan,
area.

The Sears Attitude Scale was used to measure the mothers' atti-
tudes on four dimensions: rules and restrictions, permissiveness for
dependent behavior, punitiveness for aggression toward parents, and
permissiveness for aggression toward parents. Direct observations em-
ploying predetermined categories and three-minute time sampling periods
were made to obtain measures of the children's dependent, independent,
and aggressive behavior during the nursery school period.

Based on findings from previous studies, primarily those of Sears
and associates, several hypotheses were made. Analysis of the data re-
vealed support for some of the hypotheses but not for others.

The main results of the study were:

1. As measured on the Sears Attitude Scale, mothers

39

girls.

40

of boys and mothers of girls were not differentially
permissive or restrictive for rules and regulations,
punitiveness for aggression toward parents, permis-
siveness for aggression toward parents, or permis-
siveness for dependent behavior.

2. No significant sex differences were found
in the children's dependent, independent, and aggres-
sive behavior in the nursery school setting.

3. A negative relation was found between mater-
nal punitiveness, as measured on the attitude scale,
and observed dependent behavior for girls. However,
essentially there was no relation between maternal
punitiveness and observed dependent behavior for boys.

4. Mothers who score low on permissiveness and
high on punitiveness tend to have children who score
high on aggression, while mothers who score high on
permissiveness and low on punitiveness tend to have
children who score low on aggression.

5. Mothers who score low on permissiveness and
high on punitiveness tend to have children who score
high on dependency and/or low on independence.
Maternal punitiveness apparently inhibits dependent behavior in

However, the increase of dependent behavior found when the dual

influence of maternal punitiveness and permissiveness for aggression are

considered, after grouping boys and girls together, suggests that these

relations need further study. With a larger sample, where subgroups of

boys and girls could be analyzed separately, more information could be

41

obtained about the influence of maternal, and possibly paternal, puni-
tiveness and permissiveness for aggression toward parents not only on
dependency but on independence and aggression.

It also appears that more reliable and valid instruments must
be developed for measuring the mothers' attitudes toward dependent and
aggressive behavior, as well as the children's behavior, particularly
dependent behavior. Further, since independence appears to be a sepa-
rate dimension from dependency and not a bipolar aSpect of dependency,
it may prove fruitful to develop a scale measuring mothers' attitudes
toward independent behavior, as well as improving methods of measuring
children's independent behavior.

Perhaps a closer look into the patterning of both boys and girls
on the variables of dependent, independent, and aggressive behavior would
provide clues which would aid in the development of more adequate instru-
ments to measure not only the children's behavior, but the mothers' atti-

tudes on the three dimensions as well.

REFERENCES

Beller, Emanuel K. "Dependency and Independence in Youn Children,"
The Journal of Genetic Psychology, LXXXVII (1955 , 25-35.

Brown, Paul, and Elliott, Rogers. "Control of Aggression in a Nursery
School Class," Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 11
(1965), 108- 20.

Gordon, Jesse E., and Smith, Edward. “Children's Aggression, Parental
Attitudes and the Effects of an Affiliation-Arousing Story,"
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1, No. 6 (1965),
654-59.

Hartup, Willard W., and Keller, E. Duwayne. "Nurturance in Preschool
Children and its Relation to Dependency," Child Development,
XXXI (1960), 681-89.

Heathers, Glen. "Emotional Dependence and Independence in Nursery
School Play," The Journal of Genetic Psychology, LXXXVII (1955),
37- 57.

Jones, Laurel M. "An Attitude Measure of Parental Permissiveness."
Unpublished Master's thesis, Stanford University, 1961.

Levin, Harry, and Sears, Robert R. "Identification with Parents as a
Determinant of 0011 Play Aggression," Child Development,
XXVII (1956), 135-55.

McCandless, Boyd R. Children and Adolescents: Behavior and Development.
New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1963.

McCord, William, McCord, Joan, and Howard, Alan. "Familial Correlates
of Aggression in Nondeliquent Male Children," Journal of
Abnormal and Social Psychology, LXII (1961), 79-93.

McCord, William, McCord, Joan, and Verden, Paul. "Familial and Behav-
ioral Correlates of Dependency in Male Children," Child Develop-
ment, XXXIII (1962), 313-26.'

Mussen, P.H., and Naylor, H.K. "The Relationships Between Overt and
Fantasy Ag ression," Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology,
XLIX (1954), 235-40.

Purcell, K. "The TAT and Antisocial Behavior," Journal of Consulting
Psychology, xx (1956), 449-56.

 

42

43

Sears, Pauline S. "Measurement of Dependency and Aggression in Doll
Play," American Psychologist, III (1948), 263.

 

Sears, Robert R. "Comparison of Interviews with Questionnaires for
Measuring Mothers' Attitudes Toward Sex and Aggression,"
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 11, No. l (1965),
37.44 a

 

Sears, Robert R., Maccoby, Eleanor E., and Levin, Harry. Patterns of
Child Rearin . White Plains, New York: Row, Peterson and 7
Company, 195 .

 

 

Sears, Robert R., Rau, Lucy, and Alpert, Richard. Identification and
Child Rearin . Stanford, California: StanfordiUniverETty
Press, I965

 

Sears, Robert R., Whiting, J.M., Nowlis, V., and Sears, P.S. "Some
Child Rearing Antecedents of Aggression and Dependency in
Young Children,“ Genetic Psychology Monographs, XXXXVII (1953),
135-234.

 

Siegel, Alberta E. "Aggressive Behavior of Young Children in the
Absence of an Adult," Child Development, XXVIII (1957), 371-78.

 

Smith, J.R., and Coleman, J.C. "The Relationship Between Manifestations
of Hostility in Projective Tests and Overt Behavior," Journal
of Projective Technigues, XX (1956), 326-34.

Walters, J.C., Pearce, Doris, and Dahms, Lucille. "Affectional and
Aggressive Behavior of Preschool Children," Child Development,
XXVIII (1957), 15-26.

APPENDICES

APPENDIX I

Sears Attitude Scale

46

Sears Attitude Scale

A SURVEY OF ATIITUDES TOWARD CHILDREN' 3 BEHAVIOR

INSTRUCTIONS

Several hundred mothers of 4 to 5 year-old children were interviewed
about their feelings toward children. On these pages we have listed
quite a few quotations from what different ones have said. Most of the
quotations refer to the mothers' comments about children's angry behavior
and their dependent behavior. As you will see, there was a good deal of
difference of opinion among the mothers. We now want to find out how
other mothers feel about each of these statements. You will probably
agree with some of them, and disagree with others. You may feel quite
strongly about some, but not very strongly about others. On some you
may not be sure how you feel -- or you may just not care one way or
another.

Will you please put an X or check in one of the five boxes at the
right of each statement to show how 19}; actually feel or what y_o_u_ generally
do? Do 22S. put how you think you should feel or what you think you should
do. Make only one mark for each statement.

Of course, some of these quotations may not apply to you. If one
of them talks about "my daughter" -- and you don't have a daughter --
all you can do is give your answer on the way you feel generally, or
the way you think you would feel or what you would do if you did have
a daughter.

We are interested in what Log do or what 103 would do with your child
There are no right or wrong answers; no answer has a higher value than
another answer .

Remember that all the mothers who ‘made these statements were talking
about their 4 to 5 year-old children. Unless the quotation actually
refers to the child when he was a different age, think of what the state-
ment says as being about a 4 to 5 year-old.

A...

47

GENERAL grammar; ggasnoumgg

ERNIE? BACKGROUND

1. Your full name Date of Birth

2. iuarital Status: Married Divorced Separated Divorced for the

second time Widow Widow and now married for a second time

3. Husband's name Date of Birth

EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND

1. How much education have you completed: Gradeschool
Highschool
College
Number years completed

Highest degree obtained

2. If you are a college student presently, answer these questions:

a. What is your major:

 

b. Degree you are working toward:

 

If your husband is a student,

c. What is your husband's major:

 

d. Degree he is working toward:

 

9.

10.

48

QUESTIONNAIRE

Mothers' Statements about Rules and Restrictions

Sometimes when you tell them to do something,
they are thinking of something else, and you
should give them time to do it.

There are certain things, like getting up in
the middle of a meal, that I will not permit.

I like to have him hang up his hat and jacket
as soon as he comes inside. He doesn't always
remember, but I make him go back and do it.

When she was little, I started to train her to
pick up her toys and put them away.

It is hard to get them to respect each other'e
things, because they want them and they don't
understand.

Once in awhile I let them stay up a little
later -- like on Friday night when there's
nothing special happening the next day.

Maybe I'll tell her twice to do something,
but if she doesn't -- that's all!

I don't like to have him dawdle with his
food.

I tell her she has to do her household jobs,
and if she doesn't do them, she can't go out
and play.

When he is going somewhere, he should be
dressed neatly -- and be made to realise
that he has his good clothes on and should
keep them clean.

Not Sure
Disagree

' Strongly Agree

U
El ' Agree
1:]

1:113
DD
131:]
DU 1:]

EDGE:
DUDE)

DUDE

DUDE]
DUDE?
DUDE

[:1 [j 1:] 1:] U D U ~ Strongly Disagree

Ell]

[JUL—11:11:)

 

-
u.
u
_g.,.,
.
- u

-r.
I.
v
u
.
n
.
’l
I
l
I
..
- e
v a

s
I .
.01
a
I.
a
p

a- n-

 

 

11.

12.

13.

14.

15.

16.

17.

18.

19.

20.

21.

22.

23.

49

You know how boys are; they're rough and its
hard to keep them clean, so we expect very
little of him.

Right now their rooms are always messy, but

I just let it go. When they get a little older,
they'll deve10p an interest in how their rooms
look.

I expect the children to help me keep the house
looking neat and clean.

I don't believe a child his age should be given
any regular jobs around the house.

They will have enough responsiblities later on,
so why make them work now?

I've taught her to wash up the moment she comes
in from outdoors.

She never gets into our closets or our dres-
sers -- that is one thing I won't permit.

I think respect for other peoples' property
is one of the most important things a child
can be taught.

When it's bedtime, it's bedtime just bath,
teeth, bed, and lights out.

I let him spend as web time watching TV as
he wants.

All children go through stages of playing
with their food, so when he did it I didn't
pay too such attention to him.

I have punished him severely when he has
marked up things; he met learn to care for
his home.

It is important from the beginning to teach
them not to do things like marking on the
walls or jumping on the furniture.

Strongly Agree

[:1
Cl

13

E]
E]
E]
E
E]
D

E] E] [11:]

Agree

[:1

E3
E]
C]
Cl
C]
D

C113

[:1

E1

[1

Not Sure
Strongly Disagree

[3
C] Disagree
[1

C1
El
[:1

DEC.)

[JUL—J

24 .

26.

27.

28.

29.

30.

31.

32.

33.

35.

36.

37.

50

We aren't too concerned with what belongs to
whom around our house.

She begs sometimes to stay up and watch TV,
but that doesn't go over too well. She goes
to bed just the same.

I try to have a special place for them in the
house -- a chair they can jump on, a room they
can mark up as much as they want.

I don't think a child her age should be allowed
to watch just any TV program.

He has no special bedtime; he just goes to sleep
when he gets tired.

I try to teach her to be polite and say "Hello"
when she sees somebody she knows .

If he stays up late one night, then he will
want to stay up the next night too, so I just
don't give in at all.

I don't believe a child has to drop what he
is doing and run to you there and then.

He has to learn that he must sit quietly and
wait until everyone else is through talking.

You can't expect them to remember their good
manners all the time; they will all slip up
once in awhile.

I encourage him to help me with things around
the house, but I don't enforce it.

I don't like running around or wrestling or
playing cowboys in the house -- I believe
that's for the outdoors.

If you don't get obedience now, you'll never
get it.

When they are this young, you shouldn't expect
them to have good table manners.

0

0

In
0 M
0 0
H a
so a

G
>5 00%
H HUI-0
N 39$
moment:
00 GO
truss
«.22....

E
D

EEDEE
EEDEE

EDEEE
EEEEE
EEDEE
EEDEE

EEDEE
EEEED
EEDEE

EDEDE
EEDEE

EEDEE
EEDEE

.At

38.

39.

40.

41.

42.

43.

45.

46.

47.

48.

51

He uses his fork most of the time now, but
if he wants to use his fingers now and then,
I don't care.

Getting a child to obey should not be a major
goal of a parent.

Strongly Agree
Strongly Disagree

D
E] D Agree

D D

Not Sure
Disagree

D D
D D

Mothers' Statements about Qggndent Behavior

Unless I'm really busy, I like to have the
children around me all the time. I enjoy
having them help me.

I think as long as I have something for him
to do, like a toy to play with, that he should
be satisfied to play by himself.

I can't stand a boy who's always under foot;
so I just try not to let that kind of thing
get started.

If he wants my attention when I'm busy, I just
make him wait until I'm all through; then I
see what he wants .

If he asks for help with something that I
know he can do himself, I just tell him he
has to stay there until he does it.

I think it makes it harder for the teacher
if you baby them too much; so I just see to
it that they do things themselves.

I don't mind his wanting me to do things ‘
because they're not children very long.

I don't mind how such attention he wants
as long as I'm not busy; but if I'm busy,
I get annoyed and may push him aside.

I simply make her do things for herself; I
tell her, "You have to learn to do them;
you're getting bigger and I can't wait on
you all the time."

EEEED

D

EEEE
EEEEE
EEDEE
EEDEE

DEED

D

EEDEE
EEEEE

EEEEE

 

 

49.

50.

51.

52.

53.

55.

56.

57.

58.

S9.

52

0

0

H
0 so
0 Q
H O
a a

Q
>s 0 0 >5
H H O H
so 3 H as
a 0 U) to O
O 0 Q 0
H H U a H
U 3 0 v! u
o: z a co

He wants a lot of attention from me, and he
gets all that he asks for.

I don't mind a little kissing and loving, but
if he keeps on wanting it, I get tired of it.

D D
D D
D D

When I'm busy, I like her to wait until I'm
not so that I can sit and talk to her.

I think that by the time they're three years
old, they should get away from the habit of
holding on to you.

D EDD

She likes to be hugged and kissed, and I like
that too; I tell her, "I like a girl who likes
a lot of hugging and kissing."

D

If she asks for help with something that we
know she could do by herself, we generally
just say, "We think you're old enough to do
that by yourself."

D D D DDD
D
D
D

D

I don't think they should follow you around

all the time ... it's not necessary. I just

let them know that I don't like that kind of [:1
thing.

D

EEE

When he follows me around a lot, I feel he
needs more attention so I give him all I can.

D
D

Sometimes he makes a fuss when I go out at
night, but I never feel that I should be at D a D D 1:]
his beck and call so I just go and leave him.

Mothers' Statements ghout m Behavior

Yesterday Hark deliberately dumped a box of

soap on the floor, and I decided the best way

to handle it was to call off our afternoon E] U D D E]
walk to the playground.

I know that I have an awful temper; so I really

try to put up with the kids' sassiness and not B D a U D
get carried away punishing them.

 

n
.0.

w.

 

60.

61.

62.

63.

64.

65.

66.

67.

68.

69.

70.

53

I gave Billy all sorts of old junk to play
with, and when he got into my good dishes

and broke one, I really felt that it was time
that I showed him who's boss.

When my kids cry and fuss just because they
can't do whatever they want, I tell them to
cut it out right away, or I'll really give
them something to cry about.

Children feel bad enough when they're naughty
because they know they've been bad.

Host of all I want the children to have good
manners, and they'll never learn them unless
they're punished for naughty behavior.

When Billy is grumpy and cross, I might tell
him to cut it out, but I can't really bring
myself to do anything too drastic like sending
him to his room.

When Jim loses his temper, I just give him a
good paddling on the rear - this is something
he won't forget.

When I've told nary to stop what she's doing
and come in for lunch, she'd better come right
away, or else.

My parents didn't spare the rod with me, and
I'm not going to do that with my children
either.

Spanking kids. just makes them madder than ever
and doesn't accomplish a thing.

When Bill starts hollering and shooting off
with his mouth, I'm really tempted to wash
his mouth out with soap.

I figure that kids won't learn to be civilized

Strongly Agree
Strongly Disagree

Agree

Not Sure
Disagree

[JUDGE]

DUDE—JD
[JUDGE]
DECIDE!
SUEDE]
DECIDE]
SUEDE]
DECIDE

DECIDE]
DECIDE]

unless they're whacked now and then for behaving I] D D D [3

like little animals.

 

71.

72.

73.

74 .

75.

76.

77.

78.

79.

80.

81.

54

We all have our bad days -- when Helen gets
sassy, I figure that she's having one and
leave her alone.

When Jane deliberately threw her whole bottle
of cod-liver on the floor, I was really burned
up, and I thought I should really let her know
how mad I was.

0

fl

is
a :3
~ 3
2 c.
h 00%
H ‘53:.
games
“RU.“
020".“
U) 299’

SUEDE!

Mothers' Statements about Emotional Self-Control

 

I want my children to know right from the

start that it's wrong to disobey their parents.

My husband puts up with an awful lot of sas-
siness, and I've told him that this will
never do.

Kids are always being told what to do --
I don't see how they take it all.

I just don't believe in letting a child get
cross and angry at his parents.

It really burns me up to see my sister shut
her 4-year-old son up every time he raises
his voice.

I just can't go for all this stuff they write
in books about not stopping kids from losing
their tempers.

I think children should show respect to their
mothers, even at five years old; there's no
need for all the sassing and rudeness you see
in some children.

I hate to see Jimny in a cross rebellious
mood, and I always head it off when I see
such a thing developing.

Parents who can't take a little back-talk
from kids are really pretty small people.

EEDEE]
SUEDE!

DECIDE]
DECIDE
EEDEE

DECIDE]

Danna
DEBUG

DECIDE]

.-
. v '
o
.oo
' 40'
a
' a oar
U
a __
.4
I .
b s
- ." D a-
a n- , I '
' " ' ‘- - es.
-' o .-
- ' a . .A
s .-.

I
.0-
.- -a .
.n
a...
-a
o p—a
. .s
\v
.e- .
w“.
”.0

 

ll
~ .
I

I
.

.
e
—.
s

.0‘.

‘

:P
, 1
L.

e

O

Q
..t‘
's s
.-
o
. e
..

3
a

 

82.

83.

85.

86.

87.

88.

89.

90.

91.

92.

55

There is enough meanness in the world already,
and I want my children to grow up to be always
kind and respectful to others.

A.big temper-tantrum really clears the air.

I try never to raise my voice around the
house -- my kids just aren't going to learn
that kind of stuff.

Screaming, kicking, and biting is awful,
especially if it's at their mother.

If Janey never sassed back, I'd think there
was something wrong with her.

I'll never let my kid get the upper hand and
tell me off.

Well, when my little girl says, "Hbmmy, I hate
you!", I just sort of think that I must be
pretty hateful at times.

These mothers that let their children blow up
whenever they're bothered by some little thing
are sure going to be in for trouble later on.

The sooner a youngster learns to hold on when
he's mad, the better off he'll be later on.

I never got away with the kind of back-talk
that parents put up'with nowadays.

When Jimmy screams at me, I just figure that
he's tired like we all get sometimes.

Strongly Agree
Strongly Disagree

Not Sure
Disagree

[1
Cl
C]
E]
D

DECIDE!
DECIDE]

DDUDD
DECIDE]
[JUDGE
[JUDGE]

DUEL—JD

DECIDE
DECIDE]
DEL-IUD

..-

 

 

 

 

 

 

APPENDIX II

Letter Sent to the Mothers

57
Letter Sent to the Mothers

MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY EAST LANSING - MICHIGAN 48823

 

COLLEGE OF HOME ECONOMICS - DEPARTMENT OF HOME MANAGEMENT AND CHILD DEVELOPMENT

HOME ECONOMICS BUILDING

Omosea 18, 1965

DtAa

A sruov us reassurtv uuoen WAV Ar Tut LAaoaAroav Paesouoot IN wanes TH:
ruasr rHAsr Instuoes THE ossERVArvoN or THC ouatsseu IN Mas. Turrte's,
Mas. GIDDENB', mo Mes. Gammos' ensues.

TH! stoouo PHASE or m srwv mvowes HAvme 7H: won-urns or EAOH or me
OHILDREN nu EACH or THE Aaova MENTIONED ensues neurone To A quesrlouuAlat.

Arerwro To me sorrow or rms Lame as A rrAs-orr PORTION. Pteasr
morons WHICH or me 'rmzs vou costs 00"! to me LABORATORY PRESCHOOL
AND spans no? use: mm 45 mums nttms our 1H: emsrcouNAme.
Rerum rut rem-err scenes or me terns umronA'retv m we rustosto
arms ecu-Assamese meant.

TH: marinas mu. st HELD m we ctAsssoou venues as Unm- 3, To me
ten or m: srAmwAv.

THANK vou roe Youe oooeeaAnou.

SiNOERELY,
WILLIAM H. MAssHALL MARCIA P. KING
AssoosAre Paoressos or ResEAaon AssIsTANr

CHILD Devrtomrur

MKazc
ENOs

 

l mu. BE Ast: To com: to THE LAsoaA'roav Person-tool. To nu. our 'mr
Quas'nommee A? we rm: serous-Ian sttom

WEDNESDAY, Ooroses 2? - 3:00 To 3:45
THURSDAY, Oorosea 28 -- 11:15 To 12:00
Mono", Novmsea 1 - 3:00 To 3:45.-

TuasoAv, Now-mesa 2 - 11815 to 12:00

 

S IGNA‘I‘LIRE

APPENDIX III

Observation Instrument

59

.Aoannson doonuu Ansonsc

Observation Instrument

«unsannom .wanwcnu
.hnoun on wanaonmnav
hun>nnom monsuoanum

.noua noufiunmm

.Amnnmaonumaon
hone mo ouamnmooom
amsnnav moan Huuoom

.Amasonm axooa no ensue
uanv ozone wanhmum

.Avonasoooon avenue no
auqmv mowmwan noz

' v'..i

mmmnommumo moan

 

nmaasz.
wann
sumo

mamz

aconmonna .nonnnommom manage

manages .oanum eumnnm
.Amuunnno>v mavens now mononaoo

.Anonuocn on nomoHn>nnm
no hun>nnuu academy anoofiom

.Aaounom onnnu m onsnan on cannon
nonnoce noonncov ncown en> ansnen

.Anonnoas usonu uxnmaon nexus .mxooa
.um unused .eonununaanv momenmeann

.hun>nnom mo ounces no name
tenses was»: no mama.no>o nonamnou

.umcmaom .mmcmaaou

 

 

.moaos .maaaa .mosmsm

.Aocnnaon Hoonuu hnomnsc an no
nonuooo mo aaonuoonno on anomcoo no
nun3_xnoa on momswonv amn>wnsmoz

.snonno
no hunomonn mommaom no consumam

.Asona a manhunnman no uauuan can:
menaaom no nonwm wasnv mosunpm

.onsneom wnnaousunna

.Aouauanounoa sn> nsauoao :es some:
on onmamnuov manque now monoaaou

.eoxnnua .eunm

.aunsmnouon .usemon .amoaqc

ooweeo snows mm

 

 

 

 

.GOnuooumo Hmong a sun:
no .nomnonon e.c0onom on museum

.aonuuonao Hanna» Auns_conoeonwwu
no ouconomnonan e.a0anoe nuance“

.Amaoe aunmmumv hamaoo on nonsmom
.oaon unmanaov no>o manxmn .30:

an: mnwsone .wannoEOe on on an: wan
sedan no mousse ha nonnoan unconna
.hanaoucn anode «moan

.nonuoco an monoumo muamnenamm
no unoofino .eaonuuowwse nonsmom

.hmnuoc o>nuos enonuo monocwH
.ann monomonmno no enumuaou madman

gamma .ou mxfimn 053.:0unoe monoan
oocmmamqovoH amaonuoam

 

 

 

.aOmnoq a nun: .moumaom .muom

.ueosuon no unease
.cOnunommsu e.no£uoem on eonsmaou

.comnom on .nnnauu no unuofiao unommo
.aonuaouuo one» on mac enema

.unmnnnmncn .maoe on connconns
manna .mson hnmeuoooecs exn<

.nnou noxnn on an cannon exec
.hmam ouan nouns on exoom

.aounom noon on on mason no
monsoon .nucnemn mouse .on emcnno

.aounoa monounaa no maoaaom
.oaaonm amen: .monunma .monomonm94
someone on Hmaouuoam

 
 

III III III III III III ||II II III IIIII III III II III III

3 1 29300669