Essay extract - Baumrind's Parenting style and Maccoby & Martin's Parenting Style Typologies
Chapter 2 Literature Review
In this chapter, the two parenting style typologies will be discussed - Baumrind’s Parenting Style Typologies, and Maccoby and Martin’s Parenting Style Typologies. The previous studies conducted on the relationship between parenting style and academic achievement will be reviewed. Maternal and paternal parenting style on students’ academic achievement which is the main focus of this study will be discussed in detail.
2.2 Parenting Style Typologies
According to Spera (2005) the dimensions of parenting styles that were examined by early researchers include: acceptance/rejection (Symonds, 1939), dominance/submission (Symonds, 1939), emotionally involved/uninvolved (Baldwin, 1948), democratic/autocratic (Baldwin, 1948), responsiveness/unresponsiveness (Baldwin, 1948; Schaefer, 1959), control/noncontrol (Schaefer, 1959), and restrictiveness/permissiveness (Becker, 1964). A theory of parenting style developed by Baumrind in the late 1960s and early 1970s is one of the most popular and important approaches (Jackson, 2002).
2.2.1 Baumrind’s Parenting Style Typologies
Baumrind (1967, 1971, 1989, 1991a) conducted extensive interviews and observations with parents and children, and proposed three qualitatively different patterns of parenting styles: authoritarianism, authoritativeness, and permissiveness. Baumrind’s parenting style was developed from analyzing parenting in largely middle class, white families. The three parenting styles have different consequences on children cognitive and social competence development (Dornbusch, Ritter, Leiderman, Roberts, & Fraleigh, 1987). These three parenting styles differ in behaviours, values, and standards which parents expect their children to adopt.
Baumrind’s basic parenting style typologies were obtained by studying separate samples of children and their families (Baumrind, 1967). Thirty-two families were selected after prolonged observations of the preschool children’s patterns of behaviour in the nursery school setting. The three prototypic patterns of parental authority – authoritative, authoritarian, and permissive – emerged from the study.
A longitudinal study was conducted by Baumrind (1971) where 134 middle-class Caucasian aged four to five participated in the study. Children were born in the year 1964 and were first studied in the year 1968 to 1969. This is the most comprehensive study on preschool children and was also the first wave ongoing longitudinal study. This longitudinal study was different from the previous study conducted by Baumrind (1967) where in the previous study, families were selected on the basis of their children’s patterns of behaviour and their parents were then compared, but in this longitudinal study families were classified on the basis of the parents’ patterns of behaviour and their children were then compared. Families were classified into authoritative, authoritarian, and permissive prototypes. From this longitudinal study using preschool sample, Baumrind (1971) obtained a classification of parenting style.
Baumrind (1971) suggested that authoritarian parents often try to shape, control, and evaluate their children’s behaviour based on the absolute set of standards. They have high maturity demands on their children because they are unable to tolerate children’s inappropriate behaviours. They discouraged verbal give-and-take and believe that children should just follow the commands of parents. They emphasize absolute obedience and respect for authority among their children. They are strict and often assert power on the children when children misbehave. When socializing with their children, authoritarian parents expect children to follow their rules and regulations without interacting with their children on the rationale behind the rules. Authoritarian parents are high on firm enforcement and maturity demands and less responsive and psychologically differentiated.
Baumrind (1971) suggested that permissive parents are less controlling than they are warm and autonomy granting. Permissive parents make little mature demands on their children compared to other parents. They avoid the use of punishment on their children. They are often noncontrolling of their children behaviour and activities and allow children to self-regulate as much as possible. They are high in tolerating their children misbehaviour. They attempt to behave in nonpunitive, accepting and affirmative manner toward their children desires, actions, and impulses. They present themselves as resources to be used by their children instead of being responsible in shaping and altering their children’s behaviour. When socializing with their children, permissive parents often show less concern to their children. Children of permissive parents did not differ significantly from children of authoritarian parents. However, compared with children of authoritative parents, they were less achievement oriented. Children of permissive parents were less cognitively competent compared to children of authoritative parents.
In contrast to authoritarian and permissive parents, Baumrind (1971) suggested that authoritative parenting style is considered to fall between the two extremes - authoritarian and permissive parenting style. Authoritative parents recognize the rights of both parents and child. They attempt to guide their children activities in a rational and oriented manner. They expect high mature demands on their children through encouraging verbal give-and-take and supportive. They provide firm and clear rules to children and use commands when is necessary. They encourage children to be independent and confront their children in order to obtain conformity and expect their children to respect their norms. They control children behaviour as needed but were responsive and interact frequently and effectively with children. Authoritative parents are responsive in which they are supportive, loving, and committed and cognitively responsive to the needs of their children by providing challenging and stimulating environment. When socializing with their children, authoritative parents often provide their children with the rationale for their rules or actions. Authoritative parents are high on firm enforcement and maturity demands. In contrast to authoritarian parents, authoritative parents are also responsive and psychologically differentiated. Children of authoritative parents are significantly more competent and achievement oriented than other children.
In the study, Baumrind (1971) found that authoritative parents had children who appeared most competent or highly socialized in the school. Children whose parents were authoritarian and permissive had children who were less competent in the school. Baumrind (1971) pointed out that both authoritative and authoritarian parenting styles are high in controlling children’s behaviours, but only authoritative parenting provide rationale on their demands and provide support for their child autonomy. Thus, authoritative parents encourage academic and social competence of their children by balancing the need of autonomy.
The second wave longitudinal study data was collected when the children were at the age of nine (Baumrind, 1989). The sample consisted of 164 children and their parents where 104 were studied in the first wave longitudinal study and 60 were new added subjects. The parents parenting style and children level of competence was identified. The classification of parenting style was based on both mother’s and father’s profile on specific parent behaviour rating composites measuring “demandingness” and “responsiveness”. The parenting style identified include: authoritarian, authoritative, permissive, traditional and rejecting-neglecting. Authoritarian parents were highly demanding but not responsive. Authoritative parents were both demanding and responsive. Permissive parents were highly responsive but not demanding. Traditional parents exhibited different parenting style in which fathers were highly demanding but nonresponsive while mothers were highly responsive but nondemanding. Rejecting-neglecting parents are low in demanding and responsiveness. Children level of competence include: optimal competent (high scores on both socially assertive and socially responsible), incompetent (low scores on both socially assertive and socially responsible), and partially competent (average scores on both socially assertive and socially responsible).
The results revealed that children raised by authoritative parents, girl raised by authoritarian parents, boys raised by traditional parents were competent. Children raised by rejecting-neglecting parents and girls raised by permissive parents were incompetent. In contrast, 67 percent of boys raised by rejecting-neglecting parents were incompetent and 85 percent of children raised by authoritative parents were optimally competent. Compared to each other, more children from demanding families (authoritative, traditional, and authoritarian) were optimally competenet and more children from nondemanding families (permissive and rejecting-neglecting) were incompetent.
The third wave longitudinal study data was collected when the children were at the age of fifteen (Baumrind, 1991a). The sample consisted of 139 adolescents and their parents. Three parent behaviour scales: directive/conventional control (D/C C), assertive control (AC), and supportive control (SC) were used to define the six parenting types. The parenting type identified in this study include: authoritative (high on AC and SC), democratic (medium on AC, high on SC, not-high on D/C C), directive (medium-high or high on D/C C and AC and medium-low or low on SC), good-enough (medium-low to medium-high on D/C C, AC, and SC), nondirective (low D/C C and AC; medium-high or high SC), and unengaged (low or medium-low on SC and AC).
The results indicated that adolescents of authoritative and democratic parents were more competent than other adolescents. They were more achievement oriented, cognitively motivated, and had the highest scores on verbal and mathematics achievement tests. Adolescents of directive parents performed poorly on verbal and mathematics achievement tests and showed more internalizing problem behaviour. Adolescents of good enough parents as the name indicated were adequately but not outstandingly competent. Adolescents of nondirective parents were less achievement-oriented and nonconforming when compared to adolescents of democratic and authoritative parents. Adolescents of unengaged parents also known as rejecting-neglecting were more antisocial, lack of social responsibility, cognitive competence, and self-regulation (Baumrind, 1991a).
The findings of the three wave longitudinal study by Baumrind were consistently stable from preschool sample to adolescent sample. The linkages between aspects of parenting and children’s functioning was found to persist into adolescence. Authoritative parenting style is often associated with the highest competence while permissive and authoritarian parenting style is often associated with lower competence.
According to Gfroerer, Kern, and Curlette (2004) Baumrind’s conceptualization of parenting styles (authoritarian, authoritative, and permissive) parallels with Adlerian theory on parenting. The positive effects of authoritative parenting on children support Adlerian theory which has emphasized the importance of cooperative, warm parent-child relationship and clear boundaries between parents and children. Baumrind’s description of “authoritative” parenting overlapped with what Adlerians normally define as “democratic”.
The different parenting style helps predict students’ ability in learning (Lamborn, Mounts, Steinberg, & Dornbusch, 1991). Authoritative parenting seems to be the most appropriate parenting style. Authoritative parenting was most strongly related with school performance (Dornbusch, Ritter, Leiderman, Roberts, & Fraleigh, 1987; Steinberg, Mounts, Lamborn, & Dornbusch, 1991; Chao, 1994). Baumrind (1996) was aware and pointed out that people need to be caution that authoritative parenting style may not be beneficial in some culture and for children from dangerous and low income areas.
2.2.2 Maccoby and Martin’s Parenting Style Typologies
In an influential review published in the Handbook of Child Psychology, Maccoby and Martin (1983) updated Baumrind’s parenting style by defining parenting style using two dimensions: parental demandingness (control, supervision, maturity demands) and parental responsiveness (warmth, acceptance, involvement). The interaction between the two dimensions produced four distinct parenting styles. A primary difference between Baumrind’s parenting style typologies and Maccoby and Martin’s parenting style typologies is that Baumrind discussed on “permissive” parenting while Maccoby and Martin differentiates between two types of permissive parenting.
Authoritarian parents are characterized by high in demandingness but low in responsiveness. Authoritative parents are characterized by high on both demandingness and responsiveness. The two types of permissive parenting as discussed by Maccoby and Martin (1983) are indulgent parents and neglecting parents. Indulgent parents are characterized by low on demandingness but high on responsiveness while neglecting parents are characterized by low on both demandingness and responsiveness.
Indulgent parents are warm, accepting, and tolerant but make few demands for mature behaviours, exercise little authority, and allow children to self-regulate as much as possible. Neglecting parents do not care much of their children’s behaviour and parents are often too preoccupied by their own problems and thus neglect their children. Neglecting parents often neglect their parental responsibilities.
In the later work, Baumrind (1991b) also used the concepts of demandingness and responsiveness in explaining parenting style. Baumrind (1991b, p.748) defined
Demandingness refers to the claims parents make on the child to become integrated into the family whole by their maturity demands, supervision, disciplinary efforts and willingness to confront the child who disobeys. Responsiveness refers to actions which intentionally foster individuality, self-regulation and self-assertion by being attuned, supportive and acquiescent to the child’s special needs and demands.
Baumrind (1991b) used the two dimensions to derived four prototypes – authoritative (high on both demandingness and responsiveness), authoritarian (high on demandingness and low on responsiveness), permissive (low on demandingness and high on responsiveness), and rejecting-neglecting (low on both demandingness and responsiveness). The dimensions reflect two types of demands: those demands made by children on society and those demands made by society on children (Baumrind, 1991). According to Baumrind (1991b) that relying on the measurement of demandingness and responsiveness in explaining the differences in the quality of control in authoritarian and authoritative parents is insufficient. This is because the measurement of demandingness and responsiveness do not include the assessment of other important criteria such as restrictiveness, coerciveness and warmth. Baumrind (1991b) differentiated the two aspects of demandingness: restrictiveness and firm control. Authoritative and authoritarian parents are both high in firm control but authoritarian parents are highly restrictive.
2.3 Parenting Styles and Academic Achievement
Although the proposed study will be looking at both maternal and paternal parenting style separately, it is important for us to review on the past studies which look at parenting style of mother and father in a general categorization by averaging the parenting scores of mothers and fathers or without having separate analyses for mothers and fathers style of parenting. By reviewing the studies, a general idea on the relationship between parenting style and children academic achievement can be obtained.
Following the research conducted by Baumrind (1967, 1971, 1989, 1991a) on parenting style, Dornbusch, Steinberg, and their colleague went on to conduct studies that examined on parenting styles and students’ academic achievement by using a larger and more heterogeneous sample (Spera, 2005). Dornbusch Ritter, Liederman, Roberts, and Fraleigh (1987) examined parenting styles based on Baumrind’s typology - authoritarian, authoritative, and permissive and school performance among 7,836 high school adolescents in San Francisco. Student’s school performance was based on the measure of self-reported grade-point averages. Dornbusch et al. (1987) used a large-scale questionnaire study of adolescents in high schools to obtain indirect measures of the parenting style. The questionnaire measuring parenting style was developed by Dornbusch et al. (1987). The results revealed that authoritative parenting style was positively correlated with students’ school grades while authoritarian and permissive parenting style was negatively correlated with students’ school grades. The relationship found was consistent across ethnic, parental education, gender, and age.
Even though, the findings by Dornbusch et al. (1987) were interesting, there were some limitations in the instrument used in examining the parenting style. One of the limitations is that there were a number of academic-related content in the questionnaire (Buri, 1991). The instrument that was used did not allow for separate measurement of the parenting style exercised by mothers and fathers. In addition, the Cronbach alpha coefficients of the scales were .60 for permissiveness, .70 for authoritarianism, and .66 for authoritativeness and was considered as moderate in strength.
Steinberg, Lamborn, Dornbusch, and Darling (1992) conducted a longitudinal study to examine the effects of authoritative parenting styles on student academic achievement by using a large and heterogeneous sample from nine high schools in Wisconsin and northern California. The parenting styles were classified into one of the four groups: authoritative, nonauthoritative, somewhat authoritative, and somewhat nonauthoritative based on the students’ rating of their parents on two dimensions: acceptance/involvement and strictness/supervision. Subjects completed the measures on parenting styles separately for mother and father. A composite score on parenting style was obtained where the total scores on the measures of parenting styles for mother and father were averaged. Subjects’ academic achievement was obtained for two consecutive years - 1987 and 1988. The results revealed that subjects were more likely to characterize their parents as authoritative. Students who perceived their parents as authoritative have higher academic performance than students who perceived their parents as nonauthoritative parenting. This finding was consistent across sex, age, and social class group.
Hickman, Suzanne, and McKenry (2000) examined the relationship between parenting styles and (a) academic achievement and (b) adjustment of college students. Subjects’ perceptions of parenting style were assessed using the Parental Authority Questionnaire (PAQ) and students’ academic achievement was based on students’ self-report college grade point average (GPA). The subscales from the PAQ were used to assess three dimensions of parenting style: authoritarian, authoritative, and permissive. Subjects completed the measures on parenting styles separately for mother and father. In order to obtain composite scores on each dimension of parenting style, researchers summed the mother and father scores and taking the average of the items. The findings revealed that authoritative parenting style was positively correlated with students’ academic achievement while authoritarian and permissive parenting style was negatively correlated with students’ academic achievement.
Garg, Levin, Urajnik, and Kauppi (2005) conducted a study to examine parenting style, family characteristics, and academic achievement using a sample of Canadian and East Indian adolescents. A questionnaire was developed by researchers based on the previously identified dimensions of parenting styles. The dimensions were acceptance/involvement and strictness/supervision. Items were measured separately for mother and father and item ratings for both parents were averaged. Parenting styles were classified into four dimensions: authoritative (high on both acceptance/involvement and strictness/supervision), authoritarian (low on acceptance/involvement and high on strictness/supervision), indulgent (high on acceptance/involvement and low on strictness/supervision), and neglectful (low on both acceptance/involvement and strictness/supervision). The results of the study indicated that the percentages of self-reported authoritative parenting were similar in both Canadian and East Indian sample. However, there were 35% of East Indian adolescents compared to only 19% of Canadian sample perceived their parents to use authoritarian parenting styles. In the Canadian sample, it was found that authoritative parenting styles was related to the highest academic achievement while neglectful parenting styles was related to the lowest academic achievement. However, in the East Indian sample, there was no relationship between parenting styles and academic achievement.
Based on the three studies cited above, in order to obtain parenting style, researchers averaged the parenting scores of mothers and fathers. Simons and Conger (2007) pointed out that by doing so, little is known on whether mother and father have similar styles of parenting.
Radziszewska, Richardson, Dent, and Flay (1996) examined the relationship between parenting style and academic achievement by using a sample of 3,993 ninth graders from Los Angeles and San Diego countries. Parenting style was measure based on students’ response to a question that assessed the degree to which the adolescents perceive their parents extended control over their lives, such as (i) whether parents made all of their decisions (authoritarian), (ii) collaborated decisions with their adolescents where parents had the final say (authoritative), (iii) where adolescents made more decisions that the parents (permissive), or (iv) if the adolescents made all of their own decisions (unengaged). Authoritative parenting style was found to be correlated with students’ academic achievement. However, according to researchers the findings need replication as it was only based on one single question.
Park and Bauer (2002) conducted a study to examine the relationship between parenting styles and high school students’ academic achievement. The sample consisted of 8,292 European Americans, 1,176 African-Americans, 1,449 Hispanic, and 873 Asian Americans. The results revealed that there was a significant positive relationship between authoritative parenting style and high school students’ academic achievement. There was a significant negative relationship between authoritarian and permissive parenting style and high school students’ academic achievement.
Jackson (2002) investigated 111 ninth grade students’ perceptions towards their parents’ style of parenting and academic achievement. Subjects were from one public high school in the States. The data of parenting style was collected based on students’ report on Steinberg et al.’s (1994) Authoritative Parenting Measure and students’ academic achievement was assessed using their current grade point averages. The parenting styles were classified into one of four groups: authoritative (high on both acceptance/involvement and psychological autonomy granting), authoritarian (high on acceptance/involvement and low on psychological autonomy granting), permissive (low on acceptance/involvement and high on psychological autonomy granting), or uninvolved (low on both acceptance/involvement and psychological autonomy granting) based on the students’ rating of their parents. The finding of the study was that there was a relationship between parenting style and students’ academic achievement. Authoritative parenting style was positively associated with academic achievement while authoritarian parenting style was negatively associated with academic achievement.
McBride-Chang and Chang (1998) conducted a study in Hong Kong on parenting style and academic achievement using a sample of children and adolescents (ages 12 to 20) using Parental Authority Questionnaire (PAQ). The PAQ questionnaire pertaining to mother or father was reworded to parents so that either mother or father of the students would be able to rate themselves on each dimension. Students academic achievement was based on school ranks (rank 1, highest achieving to rank 5, lowest achieving). It was found that Baumrind’s parenting styles as reported by parents do predict students’ academic achievement. Parents with children in rank 1 schools rated themselves as significantly higher on authoritative parenting style than parents with children in rank 5 schools. Parents with children in rank 1 schools rated themselves as significantly lower on authoritarian parenting style than parents with children in rank 5 schools.
Using Dornbusch et al.’s (1987) measures of parenting style, Lim (1998) conducted a study in one of the Malaysia secondary school. Lim (1998) examined the relationship between perceived parenting style and students’ academic achievement. The sample consisted of 98 form 4 students. The findings of the study indicated that more students in the sample perceived their parents as being authoritative than authoritarian or permissive. There was a significant negative relationship between authoritarian parenting style and academic achievement which is similar to the findings by Dornbusch et al. (1987). However, there was no significant relationship between authoritative and permissive parenting style and academic achievement.
Leung, Lau and Lam (1998) conducted a study on parenting style and academic achievement using Chinese high school students in Hong Kong, Australia and European American high school students. Dornbusch et al.’s (1987) measure was used in measuring parenting styles. In contrast to the findings above, authoritarian parenting was positively associated to the academic achievement among Hong Kong Chinese high school students. There was no relationship between authoritative parenting style and academic achievement among Hong Kong Chinese high school students. However, authoritative parenting style was positively associated with academic achievement among Australians and European Americans high school students.
In another study, Qing (1996) investigated the relationship of Chinese parenting style to only-children’s academic achievement using the Chinese version Parental Authority Questionnaire (PAQ) in one Beijing elementary school. The analyses showed that there was no relationship between parenting style and students’ academic achievement.
The findings on the relationship between parenting style and students’ academic achievement almost showed consistent results in the Western countries however there were mixed findings in non-western countries. Based on the findings above, the parenting studies investigating the relationship on students’ academic achievement did not include separate analyses for mothers and fathers. Thus, the conclusions made without including separate analyses for mothers and fathers are speculative (Milevsky, Schlechter, Netter, & Keehn, 2006). It is important to consider the separate analyses of maternal as well as paternal parenting style (Milevsky, Schlechter, Netter, & Keehn, 2006).
2.4 Maternal and Paternal Parenting Styles on Students’ Academic Achievement
Researchers are now more interested in having separate analyses for maternal and paternal parenting style rather than just parenting style which could be referred to just mother or father style of parenting and generalize it as parenting style or combining both mother and father style of parenting in a general categorization (Shek, Lee, & Chan, 1998; Milevsky, Schlechter, Netter, & Keehn, 2006). It is important to consider the separate analyses of maternal as well as paternal parenting style (Milevsky, Schlechter, Netter, & Keehn, 2006).
Seyed Mohammad Assadi, Nayereh Zokaei, Hossein Kaviani, Mohammad Reza Mohammadi, Padideh Ghaeli, Mahmood Reza Gohari et al. (2007) examined the relationships between maternal parenting styles, sociocultural context and scholastic achievement among 240 Iranian adolescents. Researchers measure the three maternal parenting styles – authoritative, authoritarian, and permissive by asking the adolescents to complete the Parental Authority Questionnaire (PAQ) pertaining to mother while students’ school achievement was based on official school reports of students’ average grades on the final exams. Researchers hypothesized that there is a relationship between maternal parenting styles and academic achievement where authoritative maternal parenting style is positively correlated with school grade. The results showed that each maternal parenting style significantly correlated with adolescents school grades. Maternal authoritative parenting style was positively correlated with school grades while both maternal authoritarian and permissive parenting style was negatively correlated with school grades. A multiple regression analyses revealed that maternal authoritative parenting had a positive regression weight (β = .13, p < .05) while maternal authoritarian (β = .22, p < .01) and maternal permissive parenting style (β = .13, p < .05) had negative regression weights. Researchers concluded that the findings suggested that maternal authoritative parenting style may be the most effective parenting styles. The findings in this study were only based on adolescents’ perceptions of maternal parenting. Researchers suggested that further studies are needed to examine adolescents’ perceptions of paternal parenting and academic achievement.
Gadeyne, Ghesquiere, and Onghena (2004) conducted a longitudinal study in Belgium to examine the relationship between parenting behaviour and students’ academic achievement. The data for 352 children and their parents were gathered when the children were in kindergarten to 2nd grade. Parenting styles was assessed using the Dutch Nijmegen Parenting Questionnaire where both mother and father were asked to answer the questionnaire separately. The questionnaire consisted of 50 items on specific parenting behaviours and rated based on 6-point scales. The questionnaire consisted of 8 scales and yields two dimensions – (i) parenting support and (ii) parenting control. The parenting support dimension consisted of two scales: expression of affection and responsiveness. The six scales of the parenting control dimension is broken into democratic control and restrictive control concept. The scales of autonomy, conformist childrearing, and induction belong to democratic control concepts while the scales of punishment, ignoring, and material rewarding belong to restrictive control concepts. Children academic achievement was based on students’ mathematics and English test. In line with Seyed Mohammad Assadi, Nayereh Zokaei et al. (2007) findings, the results indicated that maternal and paternal authoritarian (low in supporting dimension while high in restrictive control dimension) was negatively related to children’s mathematics achievement. Maternal and paternal authoritative (high in supporting dimension and high in democratic control dimension) was positively related to children’s mathematics achievement. However, no relationship was found between maternal and paternal parenting style on children spelling test. According to researcher, this could be due to the fact that parents value mathematics and spelling differently and deal the two subjects differently.
Tiller, Betsy Garrison, Block, Cramer, and Tiller (2003) examined the relationship between parenting styles and young elementary U.S. school-aged children’s cognitive ability. Primary Caregivers Practices Report (PCPR) was used to assess parents’ parenting style based on Baumrind’s primary parenting style typologies: authoritative, authoritarian, and permissive. Children’s cognitive performance was assessed using Brief Intellectual Ability (BIA) portion of the Woodcock-Johnson Tests of Cognitive Ability. Tiller et al. (2003) reported that maternal authoritarian parenting style significantly and negatively related to children’s cognitive ability. Paternal and maternal permissive parenting style was significantly and negatively related to children’s cognitive ability. In contrast, no relationship was found on maternal authoritative parenting style and paternal authoritarian and authoritative parenting style on children’s cognitive development. According to Tiller et al. (2003) there is a need to study mothers and fathers parenting style separately in order to rule out how different parenting style influence child outcomes.
Roopnarine, Krishnakumar, Metindogan, and Evans (2006) examined mothers and fathers parenting style on pre-kindergarten and kindergarten-age children academic skills. Mother and father were asked to fill out the Parental Authority Questionnaire (PAQ) separately and children’s academic skills were measured using the Kaufman Survey of Early Academic and Language skills. Five different dimensions of academic skills were assessed: (a) expressive, (b) receptive, (c) vocabulary, (d) numbers, and (e) composite scores. The results revealed that maternal parenting style was not related to children academic skills. Paternal authoritarian parenting style was negatively related to children receptive, vocabulary skills and composite scores. Researchers concluded that fathers’ parenting style were more influential on children academic skills than mother’ parenting style. According to the researchers, mother often seeks advice from father to give guidance on children’s development such as in educational activities and discipline. However, this does not mean that mother play a minimal role in the early educational training of children. Fathers have more influence on children academic arena while mothers have more influence on children social development. Jaipul, Ambika, Aysegul, and Melanie (2006) also noted that fathers’ parenting style were more influential on children academic skills than mother’ parenting style.
Torres-Villa (1995) examined if parenting style can predict school achievement for high school students. The sample consisted of 98 high school students. The measures consisted of the Parental Authority Questionnaire (PAQ) and Test of Non-Verbal Intelligence (TONI-2). The measure of PAQ was answered separately by mother and father. The results showed that only paternal authoritative parenting style was a good predictor of students’ GPA. Maternal parenting style does not predict students’ GPA. Similarly, Anupama, Jennifer, Amy, and Pamela (2003) also found that there is no relationship between maternal parenting style and students’ GPA.
Silva, Dorso, Azharm and Renk (2007) examined the relationship between maternal and paternal parenting styles experienced in childhood, anxiety, motivation and academic success in college students. The findings revealed that maternal and paternal authoritative parenting style, maternal authoritarian, college students’ anxiety and motivation were related to students’ grade point averages. Maternal and paternal authoritative parenting style was positively correlated with students’ grade point average. Maternal authoritarian parenting style was negatively correlated with students’ grade point average. In contrast to the findings of Roopnarine, Krishnakumar, Metindogan, and Evans (2006), paternal authoritarian parenting style was not significantly related to students’ grade point average.
In another study, Kim and Rohner (2002) examined whether academic achievement varied as a function of Baumrind’s parenting style among Korean American adolescents. Parenting style was assessed using the Parental Acceptance-Rejection/Control Questionnaire (PARQ/Control). This PARQ/Control was used to examine adolescent’s perceptions of paternal and maternal parenting style separately. Student’s academic achievement was based on student’s grade point average (GPA). The results revealed that there was no significant difference between maternal parenting style and student’s GPA. However, there was a significant difference between paternal parenting styles and student’s GPA. Adolescent of authoritative fathers achieved better GPA than adolescent of authoritarian fathers. Similarly, adolescent of permissive fathers achieved better GPA than adolescent of authoritarian fathers. Paternal authoritarian parenting style is associated with poorest academic achievement. There was no significant mean difference in adolescents’ GPA between the adolescent of authoritative and permissive fathers. The finding that paternal permissive parenting style is associated with positive academic achievement almost to the same extent as paternal authoritative parenting was inconsistent with the previous findings.
The findings from the previous study on the relationship between paternal and maternal parenting style and students’ academic achievement were inconsistent. Kim and Rohner (2002) explained that the differences found in the study can be attributed to the fundamental differentiation between paternal and maternal roles in Korea. As in Korea, mother’s role is to be a caregiver and nurturer while the father’s role is to be an educator, disciplinarian, and the “bread-winner” of the family. This can help explained why only perceived paternal parenting style is significantly related with adolescents’ academic achievement. In addition, the differences between paternal and maternal parenting style can be captured by the popular Chinese saying “Strict father, kind mother” (Shek, Lee, & Chan, 1998). Mothers are often perceived as warmer, more indulgent, and less controlling than fathers (Brendt, Cheung, Lau, & Hau, 1993). Fathers’ parenting was perceived to be harsher than mothers’ parenting may be due to their disciplinary role (Shek, 2000).
Chen, Liu, and Li (2000) noted that maternal parenting style predicts children’s emotional adjustment while paternal parenting style predicts children’s academic achievement. Forehand and Nousiainen (1993) suggested that because fathers are less involved and available than mothers, fathers parenting style may become more important in the minds of children and adolescents. However, according to Milevsky, Schlechter, Netter, and Keehn (2006) father play a more playful role in the lives of children. For example, a permissive father may complement the fatherhood role and hence may not interfere with the child as much as having a permissive mother.
Chen, Dong, and Zhou (1997) examined the relationship between authoritarian and authoritative parenting styles and (a) social and (b) school performance in Chinese families in Beijing. The sample consisted of children aged 7. A Chinese version of Block’s Child Rearing Practices Report was used to obtain the parents’ child-rearing practices. The child-rearing practices questionnaire was answered separately by both mother and father. Students’ academic achievement was assessed based on Chinese and Mathematics examination scores which were obtained from the school records. The results indicated that mothers’ authoritative parenting style and fathers’ authoritative parenting style was positively associated with children’s school achievement. In addition, mothers authoritarian parenting style and fathers authoritarian parenting style was negatively associated with children’s school academic achievement. Researchers conducted a series of regression analyses to examine the contributions of parenting variables to the prediction of children’s social and school performance. The regression analyses revealed that mothers’ authoritative parenting style was significantly and positively contributed to the prediction of academic achievement (β = .13, p < .05). Fathers’ authoritative parenting style was significantly and positively contributed to the prediction of academic achievement (β = .18, p < .01) while father’s authoritarian parenting style was significantly and negatively contributed to the prediction of academic achievement (β = - .23, p < .01). Researchers concluded that authoritarian and authoritative parenting styles in Chinese culture also serve the functions in child rearing that are similar to those in Western culture.
Shek, Lee, and Chan (1998) found that in Hong Kong, adolescents with low academic achievement were more likely to characterize both maternal and paternal parenting style as permissive and neglectful.
Chao (1994) explained a paradox in the literature involving the parenting style of Asian, which is authoritarian parenting. Authoritarian parenting has been found to link with poor academic achievement among Western children but Chinese children of authoritarian parents has been found to have good academic achievement (Leung, Lau, & Lam, 1998; Chao, 1994). Chao (1994) argued that the concepts of authoritative and authoritarian parenting are somewhat ethnocentric and do not capture the important aspects of Chinese parenting, especially in explaining the school success of Chinese children.
Chao (1994) proposed alternative measure of parenting which is thought to be more relevant for Chinese populations. The alternative measure of parenting – “Chiao Shun”in mandarin contains the idea of “training”. “Chiao Shun” as described by Chao (1994) emphasized the importance of parental monitoring and controlling children’s behaviours while providing supports and concern. It also emphasizes the need of children do well in school, work hard, and be self-discipline.
According to Chao (1994; McBride-Chang & Chang, 1998) the concept of training are absent in the Western culture. “Training” concept somewhat overlaps with Baumrind’s authoritarian parenting style (Ang, 2006). It was found that Chinese mothers scored high on both authoritarian and training parenting compared to European American (Chao, 1994). This may explain as to why Chinese and Asians score high on the authoritarian parenting style.
However, according to Chen, Dong, and Zhou (1997) that it is misleading to suggest that authoritarian parenting leads to positive outcomes (eg. academic achievement and social adjustment) in Chinese children. In fact, Chinese parents are often controlling but affectionate towards their children. In Chinese society, an ideal parent is often described as kindhearted and strict (in mandarin it is known as ci-xiang and yan ge)which is considered as similar to authoritative rather than authoritarian (Chen, Dong & Zhou, 1997). Even though there are cross-cultural differences between Chinese and Western families of authoritative and authoritarian parenting, Chen, Dong, and Zhou (1997) argued that definition of the terms of parenting styles as discussed by Baumrind is similar to those found in Western studies. Researchers asserted that authoritarian and authoritative parenting styles are pertinent when used with Chinese populations living in Chinese societies.
Authoritarian parents are strict and often assert power on children which may lead children to have negative behavioural and emotional reactions such as fear, frustration, and anger (Chen, Dong, & Zhou, 1997). Thus, authoritarian parenting is often related with maladaptive social and academic development among children and adolescents. In contrast, authoritative parenting provides explanation, affection, and guidance for children which may help boost children’s feeling of confidence and security in exploring the world and establish positive parent-child relationship. Thus, authoritative parenting is often related to children’s social and scholastic competence (Chen, Dong, and Zhou, 1997).
Chen, Dong, and Zhou (1997) argued that the findings of Chao (1994) could be flaw due to the sample being studied. Chao (1994) examined parenting styles using European American and Immigrant Chinese in America while Chen, Dong, and Zhou (1997) studied parenting styles within Chinese societies. Chen, Dong, and Zhou (1997) noted that by examining parenting styles within Chinese societies, one can avoid the confounding factors that come into play when immigrant populations are studied. According to Steinberg (2001) authoritative parenting is universally associated with positive cognitive outcomes among children and adolescents.
Durkin (1995) reviewed on the reasons on why authoritative parenting styles are associated with positive child outcomes. Based on the review, Durkin (1995) cited three reasons on why authoritative parenting style is associated with positive child outcomes. First, authoritative parents engaged in bidirection communication with their children. Durkin (1995) suggested that these interpersonal skills help children to succeed in school, both academically and socially. Second, authoritative parents provide their children with explanation for their action such as explaining on why a rule is implemented in the house. By giving explanation, this provides children with awareness and understanding on their parents’ morals, values, and goals. The transmission of the parents’ values and goals to the children equip the children with the tools needed to perform well in the school. Third, Durkin (1995) suggested that authoritative parents provide children with a high level of emotional security that lead children to have a sense of independence as well as comfort and helps them to succeed in school.
The findings on the relationship between parenting style and students’ academic achievement from the Western countries almost consistently shown that authoritative parenting style positively associated with students’ academic achievement while authoritarian and permissive parenting style negatively associated with students’ academic achievement. However, there were mixed findings when separate analyses were conducted on maternal and paternal parenting style and students’ academic achievement. Fathers and mothers often have distinctive parenting styles and may influence children in different ways. The present study attempts to investigate both maternal and paternal parenting style separately on students’ academic achievement in Malaysian setting.