Paauglių identiteto raidos, tėvų naudojamų auklėjimo stilių ir diferencijavimosi sąsajos

Abstract

Relationship with parents and quality of this relationship take an essential role in the process of an adolescent's identity development, yet the pathways linking parenting styles to adolescent's identity development are not well understood. This study aims to investigate the interrelations between parenting styles, differentiation of self and adolescent identity development. In total, 804 adolescents took part in this study and filled the questionnaire. The age of participants ranges from 14 to 18 years old. The study explores whether the links from parenting style to adolescent's identity diffusion operate through the differentiation of self. Results of a sequential mediation model revealed significant indirect effects of parenting style on adolescent's identity diffusion operating through the differentiation of self for boys. Parenting style also had a direct effect on identity diffusion for girls. Implications of these findings for understanding the processes through which parenting styles determine adolescent's identity development and gender differences of these relationships are discussed.

Family Systems Thinking as a Guide for Theory Integration: Conceptual Overlaps of Differentiation, Attachment, Parenting Style, and Identity Development in Families With Adolescents

“…Parallel to the findings on authoritative parenting, "the combination of high individuality tolerance and high intimacy tolerance (termed high family differentiation), is associated with the highest levels of adolescent and family functioning" (Gavazzi, 2011, p. 36). The parallel between parenting style and differentiation is also supported in the results from 804 adolescents (i.e., aged 14-18 years) indicating significant, positive associations between authoritative parenting and adolescent DoS (Ragelienė & Justickis, 2016). Similarly, the description of low family differentiation (i.e., low intimacy and individuality tolerance, chaotic boundaries, and disengaged family functioning) fits well with that of rejecting-neglecting parenting.…”

“…Parenting practices associated with authoritarian parenting (e.g., corporal punishment, punitive control tactics, high levels of monitoring paired with low adolescent-perceived "parental authority legitimacy") (Smetana, 2017)-are directly linked with negative adolescent adjustment and outcomes. Also, Ragelienė and Justickis (2016) found that adolescents' DoS was significantly and positively associated with authoritative parenting, not significantly associated with permissive parenting, and significantly and negatively associated with authoritarian parenting.…”

“…Parenting styles have generally been categorized along dimensions of demandingness (i.e., parents' expectations for mature decision making and limit setting) and responsiveness (i.e., parents' emotional warmth and need-specific engagement) into four general styles: (a) authoritative (or, "democratic"; e.g., Ragelienė & Justickis, 2016), which involves high demandingness and high responsiveness; (b) permissive, which involves high responsiveness and low demandingness; (c) authoritarian, which involves high demandingness and low responsiveness; and (d) rejecting-neglecting, which involves low demandingness and low responsiveness (Smetana, 2017). Authoritative parenting as a set of parenting practices and an overall approach to or style of parenting has consistently been found to be the most effective style for fostering positive adolescent outcomes across cultures and demographics (Hoeve, Dubas, Gerris, van der Laan, & Smeenk, 2011;Kordi & Baharudin, 2010;Smetana, 2017;Smetana & Ahmad, 2018).…”

“…In terms of adolescent outcomes, permissive parenting tends to share more positive outcomes than authoritarian parenting with authoritative parenting. Although authoritarian parenting is associated with decreased conflict for some non-White populations (Dixon, Graber, & Brooks-Gunn, 2008), other studies have indicated that (a) permissive parenting does not have a significant impact on spiritual intelligence, while neglecting and authoritarian parenting are negatively associated with it (Moosa & Ali, 2011); (b) does not hinder DoS and identity development, whereas authoritarian parenting does (Ragelienė & Justickis, 2016); and (c) is no less predictive of adolescents' reporting of higher life satisfaction across five domains (i.e., friends, school, living, family, and self-satisfaction) than authoritative parenting, whereas neglecting and authoritarian parenting are (Cenkseven-Önder, 2012). Thus, it is reasonable to assert that the adolescent outcomes associated with permissive parenting exceed those of authoritarian parenting (as reflected in Figure 3); this is likely because "harsh or physical discipline, yelling or scolding, expressing disappointment, and shaming, all of which are hallmarks of authoritarian parenting, have detrimental effects on child adjustment in cultures around the world" (Smetana, 2017, p. 20).…”

“…With family systems theory as the foundational framework, we point to conceptual overlap in the constructs of family differentiation and differentiation of self, adolescent attachment and internal working model, parenting style, and adolescent identity development. Across these bodies of literature, previous scholars have presented family systems theory's integrative potential with attachment theory (Byng-Hall, 1999;Skowron & Dendy, 2004;Stevenson-Hinde, 1990), parenting style (Darling & Steinberg, 1993), and positive adolescent identity development (Bonell et al, 2016;Lerner, Johnson, & Buckingham, 2015); and differentiation of self has been compared with adolescent identity development (Ragelienė & Justickis, 2016). As such, discussing the connections between only two or three of these bodies of literature is not new; this article adds to the literature by offering a more comprehensive integration of the literature on families with adolescents.…”