When Do Adolescents Accept or Defy to Maternal Prohibitions? The Role of Social Domain and Communication Style

Abstract

Drawing upon both Social-Cognitive Domain Theory and Self-Determination Theory, the goal of the present multi-informant study was to test whether the correlates of maternal prohibitions depend on what is prohibited (i.e., the content of the social domain involved), thereby contrasting moral with friendship prohibitions, as well on how the prohibition is communicated, thereby contrasting an autonomy-supportive with a controlling communication style. In a sample of adolescents (N = 196; mean age = 13.9 years; 63 % female) and their mothers (N = 185; mean age = 44 years), we first examined mean-level differences between the two domains in terms of mothers' degree and style of prohibition, as well as on a number of developmental outcomes (i.e., adolescents' legitimacy perceptions, internalization, and oppositional defiance). Both adolescents and mothers reported more maternal involvement in the moral domain (e.g., higher scores for degree of prohibition and controlling communication style). In addition, adolescents reported greater perceived legitimacy and less oppositional defiance in the moral domain (as compared to the friendships domain). Second, we tested whether associations between degree and style of prohibition and the developmental outcomes were moderated by social domain. Whereas associations between degree of prohibition and developmental outcomes either were non-significant or moderated by domain, the associations with communication style were more domain-invariant, with an autonomy-supportive style generally yielding an adaptive pattern of correlates and with a controlling style relating to maladaptive outcomes. The discussion focuses on similarities and differences in the characteristics and correlates of both types of prohibitions.

Does General Parenting Context Modify Adolescents' Appraisals and Coping with a Situation of Parental Regulation? The Case of Autonomy-Supportive Parenting

“…As previous research suggests, parents' controlling communication style would relate to both more oppositional defiance (e.g., Chen et al, 2016;Van Petegem et al, 2016) and more submission (e.g., Assor & Tal, 2012; with regard to the parental request. By contrast, when parents communicate a request in an autonomy-supportive way, adolescents would be more likely to willfully adopt and accommodate to the parental request (Grolnick, 2003;Vansteenkiste et al, 2014).…”

“…Personal issues, by contrast, are private aspects that pertain to adolescents' identity and are typically regulated by adolescents themselves, rather than by the parents (Nucci, 1996). Hence, whereas parental requests in the moral domain may be perceived less easily as a threat to the need for autonomy than requests in the academic domain, parental attempts at regulating the personal domain may especially be experienced as meddlesome and intrusive (see e.g., Kakihara & Tilton-Weaver, 2009;Smetana, 2006;Van Petegem et al, 2016).…”

The impacts of motivational framing of technology restrictions on adolescent concealment: Evidence from a preregistered experimental study

“…Findings from economic games suggest that feeling that one is seen to be a trusted partner fosters the desire to cooperate rather than defect in exchanges with others (Rabbie, 1991). More proximally, work expanding on psychological reactance theory (Brehm, 1966) has shown that the use of controls which restrict freedom elicit reactance (Vansteenkiste et al, 2014, see also Dillard & Shen, 2005Quick & Stephenson, 2008), perhaps due to a desire to restore independence in the absence of a feeling of choice (van Petegem et al, 2017). Such feelings might lead to behavior in opposition to wishes (Chartrand, Dalton, & Fitzsimons, 2007), and general behavior problems (Van Petegem et al, 2015).…”

Adolescents' responses to parental regulation: The role of communication style and self-determination

“…In particular, parental regulation of personal issues (e.g., friendships) may be more challenging and may be experienced as more illegitimate and autonomy frustrating than parental regulation of academic issues (Smetana & Daddis, 2002;Soenens et al, 2009). In line with this assumption, recent research found that parental prohibitions about friendship issues (as opposed to moral issues) are more likely to be experienced as illegitimate and to trigger oppositional defiance (Van Petegem et al, 2017a). However, the correlates of an autonomy-supportive (as opposed to controlling) communication style were relatively similar across social domains.…”

“…In line with this prediction, in a study making use of hypothetical scenarios of rule-breaking situations, Mageau et al (2018) found that autonomy-supportive strategies are perceived as more acceptable than psychologically controlling strategies. Similarly, in a study on parents' prohibitions in the domains of friendships and morality, Van Petegem et al (2017a) found that parental prohibitions are experienced as more legitimate when parents used an autonomy-supportive communication style. Taken together, theory and research indicate that parents' communication style may have implications for adolescents' appraisal of a situation of parental regulation of their academic behavior.…”