Adolescent perceptions of inductive discipline as a response to peer aggression: Variation by socialization agent and individual characteristics

Abstract

Inductive discipline can reduce problem behavior and promote moral internalization in children, but its role in reducing peer aggression in adolescence is less well‐understood, especially across diverse socialization agents. Using hypothetical vignettes, this study examined adolescents’ evaluations of and expected emotional reactions to parents’, teachers’, and friends’ inductive responses to peer aggression. Participants were 209 middle school (Mage = 12.29 years) and 266 high school (Mage = 15.86 years) students (68% female, 39.4% White, and 37.7% Black). Adolescents approved of induction and expected it to be somewhat effective at preventing peer aggression and inducing guilt and empathy. When compared with power assertion, adolescents typically viewed induction as the fairer but less effective strategy. Evaluations varied by socialization agent, aggression status, and demographics. Inductions by parents were rated consistently as most impactful and youth who were younger, female, and less aggressive appeared more responsive to such discipline. Results highlight the importance of incorporating parents into peer aggression interventions, combining confrontive and inductive responses, and providing aggressive youth with additional skills to help them better internalize the inductive messages.

Adolescents' Retributive and Restorative Orientations in Response to Intergroup Harms in Schools

“…However, similar to their concerns about whether suspension would be effective in providing a learning opportunity to the perpetrators, most adolescents reported this strategy would not fit the offense because it would not be fair, and others doubted that suspension would even achieve retribution. In this way, our findings mirror studies in which adolescents described punitive practices as unfair (Bell, 2020; Rote et al., 2020). Further, contrary to Rote et al.…”

“…Further, contrary to Rote et al. (2020) but consistent with Wachs et al. (2019), many youths in our study were uncertain regarding the effectiveness of punitive responses.…”

“…For instance, the same study by Rote et al. (2020) indicated that youth perceived inductive discipline as fairer than power assertion. Similarly, Black students who had been previously suspended in US schools reported that the disciplinary processes were unfair because punishments were excessive, and punitive practices did not allow for students to voice their perspectives (Bell, 2020).…”

“…Although it is important to consider youths' perceptions of the most effective teacher-sanctioned strategies for addressing peer harms, these descriptive judgments may differ from adolescents' prescriptive evaluations about the fairness of these strategies. For instance, the same study by Rote et al (2020) indicated that youth perceived inductive discipline as fairer than power assertion. Similarly, Black students who had been previously suspended in US schools reported that the disciplinary processes were unfair because punishments were excessive, and punitive practices did not allow for students to voice their perspectives (Bell, 2020).…”

“…Yet less is known about the moral and pragmatic concerns that guide youths' evaluations of school authorities' different approaches. In one recent study, adolescents reported that power assertion (i.e., imposing punishments) was more effective than inductive discipline (i.e., encouraging empathy and perspective‐taking) in addressing peer harms (Rote et al., 2020). Conversely, in another study, youth reported that teachers were more effective in addressing bullying when they responded with supportive‐cooperative strategies (e.g., whole‐school approaches, coordinating with parents), in comparison to supportive‐individual (e.g., talking to students, providing emotional support) and authoritarian‐punitive strategies (e.g., punishing, threatening; Wachs et al., 2019).…”